__________________________________________________________________
Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 15: Tournely-Zwirner
Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916)
Print Basis: 1907-1913
Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by
permission
CCEL Subjects: All; Reference
LC Call no: BX841.C286
LC Subjects:
Christian Denominations
Roman Catholic Church
Dictionaries. Encyclopedias
__________________________________________________________________
THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE
ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE,
DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH
EDITED BY
CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D.
EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J.
ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS
IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES
VOLUME 15
Tournely to Zwirner
New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY
Imprimatur
JOHN M. FARLEY
ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK
__________________________________________________________________
Charles-Thomas Maillard de Tournon
Charles-Thomas Maillard De Tournon
Papal legate to India and China, cardinal, born of a noble
Savoyard family at Turin, 21 December, 1668; died in confinement
at Macao, 8 June, 1710. After graduating in canon and civil law
he went to Rome where he gained the esteem of Clement XI, who on
5 December, 1701, appointed him legate a latere to India and
China. The purpose of this legation was: to establish harmony
among the missionaries there; to provide for the needs of these
extensive missions; to report to the Holy See on the general
state of the missions, and the labours of the missionaries; and,
finally, to enforce the decision of the Holy Office against the
further toleration of the so-called Chinese rites among the
native Christians. These rites consisted chiefly in offering
sacrifices to Confucius and the ancestors, and in using the
Chinese names tien (heaven) and xang ti (supreme emperor) for
the God of the Christians. On 27 December, 1701, the pope
consecrated Tournon bishop in the Vatican Basilica, with the
title of Patriarch of Antioch.
The legate left Europe on the royal French vessel Murepas, 9
February, 1703, arriving at Pondicherry in India on 6 November,
1703. It was with greater zeal than prudence that he issued a
decree at this place, dated 23 June, 1704, summarily forbidding
the missionaries under severe censures to permit the further
practice of the Malabar rites. On 11 July, 1704, he set sail for
China by way of the Philippine Islands, arriving at Macao in
China, 2 April, and at Peking on 4 December, 1705. Emperor Kang
hi received him kindly at first, but upon hearing that he came
to abolish the Chinese rites among the native Christians, he
demanded from all missionaries on pain of immediate expulsion a
promise to retain these rites. At Rome the Holy Office had
meanwhile decided against the rites on 20 November, 1704, and,
being acquainted with this decision, the legate issued a decree
at Nanking on 25 January, 1707, obliging the missionaries under
pain of excommunication latae sententiae to abolish these rites.
Hereupon, the emperor ordered Tournon to be imprisoned at Macao
and sent some Jesuit missionaries to Rome to protest against the
decree. Tournon died in his prison, shortly after being informed
that he had been created cardinal on 1 August, 1707. Upon the
announcement of his death at Rome, Clement XI highly praised him
for his courage and loyalty to the Holy See and ordered the Holy
Office to issue a Decree (25 September, 1710) approving the acts
of the legate. Tournon's remains were brought to Rome by his
successor, Mezzabarba, and buried in the church of the
Propaganda, 27 September, 1723.
Memorie stor. dell' Em. Mgr. card. di Tournon esposte con
monumenti rari ed autentici non piu dati alla luce (8 vols.,
Venice 1761-2), anti-jesuitical; (VILLERMAULES), Anec. sur
l'etat de la religion dans la Chine (7 vols., Paris, 1733-42),
Jansenistic and extremely biased against the Jesuits; PRAY,
Hist. controvers. de ritibus sinicis (Pest, 1789), German tr.
with numerous additions (Augsburg, 1791). Concerning his alleged
murder by the Jesuits see DUHR. Jesuiten-Fabeln (4 ed. Freiburg,
1904), 776, 786.
MICHAEL OTT
Antoine Touron
Antoine Touron
Dominican biographer and historian, born at Graulhet, Tarn,
France, on 5 September, 1686; died at Paris, 2 September, 1775.
Of this author but little has been written, though the number
and merit of his works have caused his name to become
illustrious, particularly in his order. He was the son of a
merchant, and seems to have joined the Dominicans at an early
age. After the completion of his studies he taught philosophy
and theology to the students of his province (Toulouse); but the
later years of his life were devoted to biography, history, and
apologetics. From his pen we have twenty-nine volumes, dealing
largely with the history of the Dominican order and the
biographical sketches of its notable men. His writings are
valuable contributions to Dominican literature, and essential to
students of Dominican history. Pere Mortier, in his "Histoire
des maitres generaux de l'ordre des freres precheurs", now in
course of publication, has made generous use of his "Histoire
des hommes illustres...". Touron's writings include his "Vie de
saint Thomas d'Aquin" (considered his best work); "Vie de saint
Dominique avec une hist. abregee des ses premiers disciples";
"Hist. des hommes illustres de l'ordre de saint Dominique"; "De
la providence, traite hist., dogmat. et mor."; "La main de Dieu
sur les incredules, ou hist. abregee des Israelites", a work in
which he shows that as often as the Chosen People proved false
to their Divine vocation, they were punished by God; "Parallele
de l'incredule et du vrai fidele"; "La vie et l'esprit de saint
Charles Borromee"; "La verite vengee en faveur de saint Thomas";
and "Hist. generale de l'Amerique depuis sa decouverte", which
is really an ecclesiastical history of the New World.
Mortier, Hist. des maitres gen. de l'ordre des freres precheurs
(5 vols., Paris, 1903-11), passim; Hurter, Nomenclator
literarius, III (Innsbruck, 1895),164-5.
VICTOR F. O'DANIEL
Archdiocese of Tours
Archdiocese of Tours
(TURONENSIS.)
Comprises the Department of Indre-et-Loire, and was
re-established by the Concordat of 1801 with the Dioceses of
Angers, Nantes, Le Mans, Rennes, Vannes, St-Brieue, and Quimper
as suffragans. The elevation to metropolitan rank of the Diocese
of Rennes in 1859, with the last three dioceses as suffragans,
dismembered the Province of Tours. The Diocese of Laval, created
in 1855, is a suffragan of Tours. For the early ecclesiastical
history of Tours we have an excellent document, the concluding
chapter "De episcopis Turonicis" in Gregory of Tours's "History
of the Franks", though Mgr Duchesne has shown that it requires
some chronological corrections. The founder of the see was St.
Gatianus; according to Gregory of Tours he was one of the seven
apostles sent from Rome to Gaul in the middle of tile third
century. Two grottos cut in the hill above the Loire, opposite
Tours, are held to have been the first sanctuaries where St.
Gatianus celebrated the Liturgy. According to Mgr Duchesne the
tradition of Tours furnished Gregory with only the name of
Gatianus, accompanied perhaps by the length, fifty years, of his
episcopate; it was by comparison with the "Passio S. Saturnini"
of Toulouse that Gregory arrived at the date 250. Mgr Duchesne
considers this date rather doubtful, but admits that the Church
of Tours was founded in the time of Constantine.
After St. Gatianus, according to Mgr Duchesne's chronology,
came: St. Litorius, or Lidoire (337-71); the illustrious St.
Martin (4 July, 372-8 Nov., 397); St. Brice (397-444), who was
accused to Celestine I of immorality and absolved by the pope,
but who remained absent seventeen years from the episcopal city,
which was governed by the intruded Bishop Armentius; St.
Eustochius (444-61); St. Perpetuus (461-91); St. Volusianus
(491-98), deprived of his see by the Visigoths, exiled to
Toulouse, and perhaps martyred; Verus (498-509), also deprived
of his see at the command of Alaric; St. Baud (546-52),
chancellor of Clotaire I; St. Euphronius (55-73), who made at
Poitiers the solemn transfer of the relic of the True Cross to
the monastery founded by St. Radegunde; the historian Gregory
(573-94). After St. Gregory the history of the diocese for two
centuries and a half is obscure and confused, but the study of
various episcopal catalogues has made it possible for Mgr
Duchesne to some-what clear up this period. Landramnus, bishop
under Louis the Pious, was by this prince appointed missus
dominicus, or royal commissary, in 825.
Among subsequent bishops were: Raoul II (1086-1117), who despite
the prohibition of Hugues, legate of the Holy See, had dealings
with the excommunicated Philip I, and under whose episcopate
Paschal II came to Tours (1107); Hildebert de Lavardin
(1125-34); Etienne de Bourgueil (1323-35), who founded the
College of Tours at Paris; the jurisconsult Pierre Fretaud
(1335-57); Jacques Gelu (1415-27), later Bishop of Embrun (see
DIOCESE OF GAP); Philippe de Coetquis (1427-41), who,
commissioned by Charles VII in 1429 to interrogate Joan of Arc,
recognized her perfect sincerity, and who was made a cardinal by
antipope Felix V. Helie de Bourdeilles (1468-84), cardinal in
1483; Robert de Lenoncourt (1484-1501), afterwards Archbishop of
Reims; Dominic Carette, Cardinal de Final (1509-14); Alessandro
Farnese (1553-54), cardinal in 1534; De Maille de Breze
(1554-97), who assisted the Cardinal de Lorraine at the Council
of Trent and translated the homilies of St. Basil; Victor le
Bouthiller (1641-70), who played an important part in the
religious renaissance of the seventeenth century; Boisgelin de
Cice (1802-4), who under the old regime had been Archbishop of
Aix and in 1802 was created cardinal; De Barral (1804-15);
Francois Morlot (1843-57), cardinal in 1853, Archbishop of Paris
at the time of his death; Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert (1857-71),
cardinal in 1873, later be came Archbishop of Paris;
Guillaume-Rene Meignan (1884-96), cardinal in 1893, known by his
exegetical works.
Tours was the capital of the Third Lionize province. The
ecclesiastical province of Tours must have been established
under the episcopate of St. Martin. Fifty years later it was in
regular operation, as is proved by, among other documents, the
synodal epistles of the Councils of Angers and Vannes in 453 and
461. (Concerning the prolonged efforts of the Breton Churches to
emancipate themselves from the metropolis of Tours and the
assistance given to this metropolis by royalty see ARCHDIOCESE
OF RENNES.) About 480 the Visigoths were masters of Tours and it
was in the Island of Amboise in 504 that the interview took
place as a result of which the Frank Clovis and the Visigoth
Alaric shared Gaul between them. But the Arising of the
Visigoths eventually roused the Catholics of Tours and when in
507 Clovis and his army entered the Visigothic kingdom Tours
opened its gate to him, and he received in that city the
consular insignia sent by Emperor Anastasius. The Saracens
threatened Tours when Charles Martel defeated them in 732. From
853 to 903 the Northmen made frequent inroads, terminated by the
victory of St. Martin le Beau. Henry II of England became Count
of Touraine in the middle of the twelfth century and the English
dominion was maintained at Tours until John Lackland renounced
it in 1214.
In the Middle Ages Tours was composed of two cities, the Roman
Caesarodunum and the Merovingian Martinopolis. The name of Tours
was strictly reserved to the ancient Caesarodunum, and the
territory of Tours depended on the archbishops. Martinopolis,
which rose around the monastery of St-Martin, took, in the tenth
century, the name of Chateauneuf and for five centuries was an
independent community. Under Louis XI the two agglomerations
were united in one which retained the name of Tours. The
cathedral of Tours, dedicated to St. Gatianus, dates from the
thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. The windows,
which belong to the thirteenth, are among the most beautiful in
France. The towers belong to the fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries. The chapter of Tours is the oldest in France. It is
said that it was established by St. Baud, who gave the canons
property quite distinct from that of the arch-diocese. Simon de
Brion, pope from 1281 to 1285 under the name of Martin IV, was
canon and treasurer of the church of St. Martin of Tours.
The prestige of the Church of Tours was very great during the
Middle Ages. In a letter to Charles the Bald Adrian II
designates it as the second in France. Philip Augustus in a
letter to Lucius III says that he considers it one of the most
beautiful jewels of his crown and that whosoever attacks this
church attacks his own person. Kings John II, Charles VII,
Charles VIII, and Henry III would never consent when they gave
Touraine in fief that this church should be separated from the
crown. It owed this prestige chiefly to the Basilica of St.
Martin. This was first built by St. Perpetuus and dedicated in
472. It was there that Clovis was clothed with the purple robe
and the chlamys sent him with the title of consul by the Emperor
Anastasius. As early as the sixth century St. Martin's was a
real religious centre. Queen Clotilde died in 545 in the
vicinity of the basilica, and in the same neighbourhood St.
Radegunde founded a small monastery, near which St. Gregory of
Tours built the Church of the Holy Cross. Ingeltrude, daughter
of Clotaire I, founded the monastery of
Notre-Dame-de-l'Ecrignole, St. Monegunde that of
St-Pierre-le-Puellier. When Charlemagne, before setting out to
receive the imperial crown at Rome, assembled at Tours (800) the
lords of his empire and divided his estates among his sons, his
wife Luitgarde died there, and was buried at St-Martin. He gave
the Church vast possessions in France and Normandy. Abbot
Ithier, his chancellor, founded with some monks from St-Martin
the monastery of Cormery. Alcuin, who succeeded Ithier in 796
and was buried in the basilica in 804, founded there a school of
calligraphy to which is due the preservation of many ancient
works. At this school, directed after Alcuin by Fredegisus
(804-34), Adelard (834-45), and Count Vivian (845-54), were
copied and illustrated the celebrated Bible of Charles the Bald
and the Gospels of Lothaire preserved at the Bibliotheque
Nationale of Paris, the Virgil in the library of Berne, the
Arithmetic of Boetius in the library of Bamberg, and the superb
Gospels preserved in the library of Tours, written throughout in
gold letters on white vellum, and on which the kings of France
took the oath as abbots of St-Martin. The beautiful artistic
labours of the canons were disturbed by the Norman invasions.
The body of St. Martin was transported by the canons to Auxerre
in 853 to safeguard it against the invasions of the Northmen.
Count Ingelger had to march with 6000 men against Auxerre in
884, before the body was restored. From 845 the abbots of
St-Martin were laymen, namely the dukes of France, ancestors of
Hugh Capet. When, in 987, Hugh Capet became King of France he
joined the dignity of Abbot of St-Martin with the Crown of
France in perpetuity. The Abbey of St-Martin had as honorary
canons the Dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, Brittany, Vendome, and
Nevers, the Counts of Flanders, Dunois, the Earl of Douglas in
Scotland, the Lords of Preuilly and Parthenay. From Clovis,
doubtless until Philip Augustus, it enjoyed the right of
coinage. Blessed Herve, treasurer of the basilica, caused it to
be rebuilt about 1000. It was in the abbey rebuilt by Herve that
Philip I, King of France, in 1092 arranged to meet Bertrade de
Montfort, wife of Foulques le Rechin, and carried her off to the
great scandal of the kingdom. Urban II, who came to Tours in
1096, refused to remove the excommunication inflicted on Philip
and Bertrade. Paschal II in 1107, Callistus 11 in 1119, Innocent
II in 1130, and Alexander III in 1163 came thither to venerate
the tomb of St. Martin. Richard Coeur de Lion in 1190 and John
of Brienne in 1223 took there the pilgrim's staff prior to
setting out on the crusade. Louis XI had great devotion to St.
Martin. The day on which he learned in the basilica itself of
the death of Charles the Bold he vowed to surround the tomb of
the saint with a silver grating, the cost of which would today
equal 2,148,000 francs. In 1522 Francis I seized this grating,
despite the chapter and the people of Tours. The devastations of
the Reformation and the Revolution destroyed the Basilica of St.
Martin. There now remain only two large towers, but at the end
of the nineteenth century Cardinal Meignan caused a new basilica
to be erected on the site of the old one.
According to the legend, the Abbey of St. Julian arose around a
church the building of which was ordered by Clovis after his
victory of Vouille over the Visigoths. It is historically
certain that there were monks from Auvergne there in the sixth
century, on whom Gregory of Tours imposed the Rule of St.
Benedict and to whom he gave the relics of St. Julian of
Brioude. The Northmen destroyed this first monastery; it was
rebuilt about 937 by St. Odo, Abbot of Cluny, and Archbishop
Theotolon. The present Church of St. Julian is a beautiful
monument of the thirteenth century.
The monastery of Marmoutier dates from St. Martin. Near the
grottos where St. Gatianus celebrated Mass he established some
cells. The cell of St. Brice is still to be seen. Another
grotto, known as the grotto of the Seven Sleepers, was inhabited
by seven brothers, cousins of St. Martin, who all died on the
same day after a lethargy. In the ninth century the Abbey of
Marmoutier was ravaged by the Northmen, and out of 140 religious
only 20 escaped massacre and were sheltered by the canons of
St-Martin. Marmoutier was subsequently inhabited by a small
colony of canons, and in 982 the abbey, which had fallen into
some disorders, was restored by St. Mayeul, Abbot of Cluny, at
the instance of Eudes I, Count of Blois and of Tours, who died a
monk at Marmoutier. Urban II came to Marmoutier in 1096 and
dedicated the newly-built basilica. Hubaud, canon of St-Martin
and brother of the heresiarch Berenger, gave to Marmoutier
superb pieces of religious gold work in order to secure prayers
for Berenger, who died at the priory of St-Come, which was
dependent on Marmoutier. The fortune of the abbey was
considerable, a popular saying runs:
"De quelque cote que le vent vente,
Marmoutier a cens et rente."
In the eleventh century 101 priories were founded dependent on
Marmoutier, ten of them in England. Hugh I, Abbot of Marmoutier
from 1210 to 1226, organized the estates of Meslay and Louroux,
which were models of agricultural exploitation, and began the
reconstruction of the basilica. The latter undertaking was
hindered by the violent attacks made by the counts of Blois on
the monks of Marmoutier. In 1253 St. Louis took the abbey under
his protection. In 1562 it was pillaged by the Protestants and
the Revolution destroyed it almost entirely. The crosier gateway
(Portail de la Crosse) which remains standing dates from the
thirteenth century. The origin of the town of Loches was the
monastery founded by St. Ours about the beginning of the sixth
century. He installed in the bed of the Indre a hand-mill which
became a place of pilgrimage. Geoffroy Grisegonelle, Count of
Anjou, founded at Loches a Byzantine collegiate church to which
he gave a girdle of the Blessed Virgin. Repaired in the twelfth
century by the prior, Thomas Pactius, this church still exists.
In the dungeon of Loches, founded about 1000 by Foulques Nerra,
were imprisoned Cardinal la Balue and the historian Comines. The
monastery founded by St. Mexme, disciple of St. Martin (d.
shortly after 463), was the origin of a gathering of people
which formed the town of Chinon.
Cardinal de Richelieu was born in 1585 at the castle of
Richelieu in the diocese. He transformed it into an imposing
chateau, built around it an entire city, which took the name of
Richelieu, and joined to his ducal peerage the town of
Champigny. The Sainte Chapelle of Champigny was built in 1508 by
the princely house of Bourbon-Montpensier to receive a thorn of
the crown of Christ and one of the thirty pieces of silver paid
to Judas. Urban VIII, who prior to his pontificate had said Mass
there, later prevented its demolition; hence the preservation of
this fine monument of the Renaissance is due to him. The church
of Cande, built between 1175 and 1215 on the site where St.
Martin died, is remarkable as a monument not only of religious
but also of military architecture. At Tours in 1163 Alexander
III excommunicated the antipope Victor and Frederick Barbarossa.
It was at the Chateau of Chinon in 1429 that Joan of Arc first
saw Charles VII and gave him confidence in her mission, and in
the same year she sent to St-Catherine-de-Fierbois in the
diocese to seek in the tomb of an ancient knight the sword of
Charles Martel. In the fifteenth century Tours had a brilliant
school of painting; unfortunately nothing remains of the
paintings executed at Notre-Dame-la-Riche by Jehan Fouquet. The
studio of the sculptor Michel Colomb was at Tours; his master
production was the tomb of Francis II of Brittany in the
cathedral of Nantes. The tomb of the children of Charles VIII in
the cathedral of Tours was the collective work of Colomb and his
pupils and of some Italian decorators.
There are in Touraine a great many chateaux rich in historic
memories, such as Plessis-les-Tours, the residence of Louis XI,
Amboise, where was hatched the plot against the Guises under
King Francis II; Chenonceaux, built by Francis I, the residence
of Diana of Poitiers and later of Catherine de' Medici;
Langeais, where Charles VIII wedded Anne of Brittany. Of the
chateau of Chanteloup near Amboise, where the Duc de Choiseul
went into exile, there remains only the pagoda. A number of
saints are honoured in a special manner or are connected with
the religious history of the diocese: Sts. Maura and Brigitta,
virgins (end of fourth century); St. Flodovaeus (Flovier),
martyr (fifth century); St. Ursus (Ours), founder of the Abbey
of Sennevieres, patron of the town of Loches, d. about 508; St.
Leubatius (Leubais), Abbot of Sennevieres (sixth century); St.
Senoch, solitary and abbot, d. in 579; St. Leobardus (Libert),
hermit of the grottos of Marmoutier, d. in 593; St. Odo, first
Abbot of Cluny, d. at Tours in 942; St. Avertinus, deacon,
companion in exile of St. Thomas Becket, d. in Touraine about
1189; Bl. Jeanne-Marie de Maille, d. in 1414 after having spent
her widowhood in the practice of a rigorously ascetic life near
the Basilica of St. Martin. Among the natives of the diocese
were: the great prose writer Rabelais (1495-1553), b. at Chinon;
the philosopher Descartes (l596-1650), b. at La Haye-Descartes;
the Abbe de Marolles (1600-81), b. at Genille, celebrated for
his translations, and whose collection of prints formed the
basis of that of the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris;
Saint-Martin, called the unknown philosopher (1743-1803), b. at
Amboise; the poet Alfred de Vigny (1797-1863), b. at Loches;
Balzac (1790-1850), b. at Tours.
The chief places of pilgrimage in the diocese besides the
grottos of Marmoutier, are: Notre-Dame-la-Riche, a sanctuary
erected on the site of a church dating from the third century,
and where the founder St. Gatianus is venerated;
Notre-Dame-de-Loches; St. Christopher and St. Giles at
St-Christophe, a pilgrimage dating from the ninth century; the
pilgrimage to the Holy Face, established by M. Dupont, "the Holy
Man of Tours", who founded the Priests of the Holy Face
canonically erected on 8 December, 1876, to administer the
chapel. Before the application of the law of 1901 there were in
the diocese Jesuits, Lazarists, and various orders of teaching
brothers. Several orders of women had their origin in the
diocese the chief being: The Sisters of the Presentation of the
Blessed Virgin, teaching and nursing, founded in 1684 at
Sainville, in the Diocese of Chartres by Mother Marie Poussepin,
and in 1813 transported to La Breteche near Tours; the Sisters
of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, teaching, founded in
1805 by the Abbe Guepin, rector of Notre-Dame-la-Riche, with
mother-house at Tours; the Sisters of the Third Order of Carmel,
since 1824 called the Sisters of St-Martin, teaching, with its
mother-house at Bourgeuil. The religious congregations were
directing in the diocese at the end of the nineteenth century 5
foundling asylums, 36 infant schools, 3 special houses for sick
children, 5 orphanages for boys, 7 for girls, 1 house of
retreat, 1 house of refuge, 18 hospitals or hospices, 2
dispensaries, 3 houses of religious for the care of the sick in
their homes, 1 home for convalescents, 5 private hospitals and
retreats. In the year 1911 the Archdiocese of Tours numbered
337,916 inhabitants, 23 deaneries, 37 first class parishes, and
254 succursal parishes.
Gallia christiaina, nova, XIV (1856), 1-151, instr. 1-98;
DUCHESNE, Les listes episcopales de la province de Tours (Paris,
1890); CHEVALIER, Les origines de l'eglise de Tours d'apres
l'histoire (Tours, 1871); PITROU, L'episcopat tourangeau, notes
biographiques (Tours, 1882) LAMBRON DE LIGNIN, Armorial des
archeveques de Tours (Tours, 1858) DE LASTEYRIE, L'eglise S.
Martin de Tours, etude critique sur l'histoire et Ia forme de ce
monument du Ve au XIe siecle (Paris 1891) DELISLE, Memoirs sur
l'ecole calligraphique de Tours au IX siecle (Paris, 1885);
MARTENE, Histoire de l'abbaye de Marmoutver, ed. CHEVALIER (2
vols., Tours, 1874-75); CHANTELOU, Marmoutier cartulaire
tourangeau et sceaux des abbes, ed. NOBILLAEU (Tours, 1879);
CHEVALIER, Promenades pittoresques en Touraine (Tours, 1869);
VITRY, Tours St less chateaux de Touraine (Paris 1905)
VAUCELLES, Catalogus de lettres de Nicotas V, conc. la prov.
eccl. de Tours (Paris, 1908).
GEORGES GOYAU
Charles-Francois Toustain
Charles-Franc,ois Toustain
French Benedictine, and member of the Congregation of St-Maur,
born at Repas in the Diocese of Seez, France, 13 October 1700,
died at St-Denis, 1 July, 1754. He belonged to a family of note.
On 20 July, 1718, he made the vows of the order at Jumieges.
After finishing the philosophical and theological course at the
Abbey of Fecamp he was sent to the monastery of Bonne-Nouvelle
at Rouen to learn Hebrew and Greek. At the same time he studied
Italian, English, German, and Dutch, in order to be able to
understand the writers in these languages. He was not ordained
priest until 1729 and then only at the express command of his
superior. He always said Mass with much trepidation and only
after long preparation. In 1730 he entered the Abbey of St-Ouen
at Rouen, went later to St-Germain-des-Pres and Blancs-Manteaux,
and died while taking his milk-cure at St-Denis. He had worn out
his body by fasts and ascetic practices. His theological
opinions were not entirely correct, as he inclined to Jansenism.
As a scholar he made himself an honoured name. He worked for
twenty years with a fellow-member of the order, Tassin, on an
edition of the works of St. Theodore of Studium which was never
printed, for a publisher could not be found. Another common
undertaking of the two is the "Nouveau traite de diplomatique"
(6 vols., 1750-65) in which they treated more fully and
thouroughly the subjects taken up in Mabillon's great work "De
re diplomatica". The publication of Toustain and Tassin is of
permanent value. The last four volumes were edited by Tassin
alone after Toustain's death. Of general interest among
Toustain's personal writings are: "La verite persecutee par
l'erreur" (2 vols., 1733), a collection of the writings of the
Fathers on the persecutions of the first eight centuries; and
"L'authorite de miracles dans l'eglise" (no date), in which he
expounds the opinion of St. Augustine. Tassin testifies that he
was zealous in his duties, modest, and sincerely religious.
TASSIN, Eloge de Toustain in Nouveau traite de diplomatique, II,
IDEM, Hist. litteraire de la congregation de St-Maur, II
(Brussels, 1770); DE LAMA, Bibliotheque des ecrivains de la
congregation de St-Maur (2nd ed., Munich-Paris, 1882), 174 sq.
KLEMENS LOeFFLER
Antoine-Augustin Touttee
Antoine-Augustin Touttee
A French Benedictine of the Maurist Congregation, b. at Riom,
Department of Puy-de-Dome, 13 Dec., 1677; d. at the Abbey of St.
Germain-des-Pres, 25 Dec., 1718. He studied the humanities with
the Oratorians at Riom, made vows at the Abbey of Vendome, 29
Oct., 1698, and was ordained priest in December, 1702. He taught
philosophy at Vendome from 1702 to 1704 and theology at
St-Benoit-sur-Loire from 1704-1708 and at St-Denis from 1708 to
1712. He then withdrew to St-Germain-des-Pres to prepare a new
Greek edition and Latin translation of the works of St. Cyril of
Jerusalem. This was issued after his death by Prudent Maran
under the title: "S. Cyrilli Hiersolymit. opera quae extant
omnia et ejus nomine circumferunter; ad mss. codd. castigata"
(Paris, 1720; also in P.G., XXXIII). It is preceded by three
learned dissertations on the life, writings, and doctrine of St.
Cyril, and was at the time the standard edition.
TASSIN, Hist. litteraire de la congreg. de Saint-Maur (Brussels
and Paris, 1770); German tr. (Frankfort, 1773-4), s.v.; LE CERF,
Bibliotheque historique et critique des auteurs de la congreg.
de Saint-Maur (The Hague, 1720), s.v.
MICHAEL OTT
Tower of Babel
Tower of Babel
The "Tower of Babel" is the name of the building mentioned in
Genesis 11:1-9.
History of the Tower
The descendants of Noe had migrated from the "east" (Armenia)
first southward, along the course of the Tigris, then westward
across the Tigris into "a plain in the land of Sennar". As their
growing number forced them to live in localities more and more
distant from their patriarchal homes, "they said: Come, let us
make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven;
and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad
into all lands." The work was soon fairly under way; "and they
had brick instead of stones, and slime (asphalt) instead of
mortar." But God confounded their tongue, so that they did not
understand one another's speech, and thus scattered them from
that place into all lands, and they ceased to build the city.
This is the Biblical account of the Tower of Babel. Thus far no
Babylonian document has been discovered which refers clearly to
the subject. Authorities like George Smith, Chad Boscawen, and
Sayce believed they had discovered a reference to the Tower of
Babel; but Frd. Delitzch pointed out that the translation of the
precise words which determine the meaning of the text is most
uncertain (Smith-Delitzsch. "Chaldaische Genesis", 1876,
120-124; Anmerk., p. 310).
Oppert finds an allusion to the Tower of Babel in a text of
Nabuchodonosor; but this opinion is hardly more than a theory
(cf. "The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia", I, pl. 38,
col. 2, line 62; pl. 41, col. 1, I. 27, col. 2, 1. 15; Nikel,
"Genesis und Keilschriftforschung", 188 sqq.; Bezold, "Ninive
und Babylon", 128; Jeremias, "Das alte Testament im Lichte des
alten Orients", 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1906, 286; Kaulen, "Assyrien
und Babylonien", 89).
A more probable reference to the Tower of Babel we find in the
"History" of Berosus as it is handed down to us in two
variations by Abydenus and Alexander Polyhistor respectively
("Histor. Graec. Fragm.", ed. Didot, II, 512; IV, 282; Euseb.,
"Chron.", I, 18, in P.G., XIX, 123; "Praep. Evang.", IX, 14, in
P.G., XXI, 705). Special interest attaches to this reference,
since Berosus is now supposed to have drawn his material from
Babylonian sources.
Site of the Tower of Babel
Both the inspired writer of Genesis and Berosus place the Tower
of Babel somewhere in Babylon. But there are three principal
opinions as to its precise position in the city.
(1) Pietro della Valle ("Viaggi descritti", Rome, 1650) located
the tower in the north of the city, on the left bank of the
Euphrates, where now lie the ruins called Babil. Schrader
inclines to the same opinion in Riehm's "Handworterbuch des
biblischen Altertums" (I, 138), while in "The Cuneiform
Inscriptions" (I, 108) he leaves to his reader the choice
between Babil and the temple of Borsippa. The position of Babil
within the limits of the ancient Babylon agrees with the
Biblical location of the tower; the name Babil itself may be
regarded as a traditional relic of the name Babel interpreted by
the inspired writer as referring to the confusion of tongues.
(2) Rawlinson (Smith-Sayce, "Chaldean account of the Genesis",
1880, pp. 74, 171) places the tower on the ruins of Tell-Amram,
regarded by Oppert as the remnants of the hanging gardens. These
ruins are situated on the same side of the Euphrates as those of
the Babil, and also within the ancient city limits. The
excavations of the German Orientgesellschaft have laid bare on
this spot the ancient national sanctuary Esagila, sacred to
Marduk-Bel, with the documentary testimony that the top of the
building had been made to reach Heaven. This agrees with the
description of the Tower of Babel as found in Genesis 11:4: "The
top whereof may reach to heaven". To this locality belongs also
the tower Etemenanki, or house of the foundation of Heaven and
earth, which is composed of six gigantic steps.
(3) Sayce (Lectures on the Religion of the Ancient Babylonians,
p. 112-3, 405-7), Oppert ("Expedition en Mesopotamie", I,
200-16; "Etudes assyriennes", pp. 91-132), and others follow the
more common opinion which identifies the tower of Babel with the
ruins of the Birs-Nimrud, in Borsippa, situated on the right
side of the Euphrates, some seven or eight miles from the ruins
of the city proper. They are the ruins of the temple Ezida,
sacred to Nebo, which according to the above-cited inscription
of Nabuchodonosor, was repaired and completed by that king; for
it had been left incomplete by a former ruler in far distant
days. These data are too vague to form the basis of an apodictic
argument. The Babylonian Talmud (Buxtorf, "Lexicon talmudicum",
col. 313) connects Borsippa with the confusion of tongues; but a
long period elapsed from the time of the composition of Genesis
11 to the time of the Babylonian Talmud. Besides, the Biblical
account seems to imply that the tower was within the city
limits, while it is hardly probably that the city limits
extended to Borsippa in very ancient times. The historical
character of the tower is not impaired by our inability to point
out its location with certainty.
Form of the Tower of Babel
The form of the tower must have resembled the constructions
which today exist only in a ruined condition in Babylonia; the
most ancient pyramids of Egypt present a vestige of the same
form. Cubic blocks of masonry, decreasing in size, are piled one
on top of the other, thus forming separate stories; an inclined
plane or stairway leads from one story to the other. The towers
of Ur and Arach contained only two or three stories, but that of
Birs-Nimrud numbered seven, not counting the high platform on
which the building was erected. Each story was painted in its
own peculiar colour according to the planet to which it was
dedicated. Generally the corners of these towers faced the four
points of the compass, while in Egypt this position was held by
the sides of the pyramids. On top of these constructions there
was a sanctuary, so that they served both as temples and
observatories. Their interior consisted of sun-dried clay, but
the outer walls were coated with fire-baker brick. The asphalt
peculiar to the Babylonian neighbourhood served as mortar; all
these details are in keeping with the report of Genesis. Though
some writers maintain that every Babylonian city possessed such
a tower, or zikkurat (meaning "pointed" according to Schrader,
"raised on high" according to Haupt, "memorial" according to
Vigouroux), no complete specimen has been preserved to us. The
Tower of Khorsabad is perhaps the best preserved, but Assyrian
sculpture supplements our knowledge of even this construction.
The only indication of the time at which the Tower of Babel was
erected, we find in the name of Phaleg (Genesis 11:10-17), the
grandnephew of Heber; this places the date somewhere between 101
and 870 years after the Flood. The limits are so unsatisfactory,
because the Greek Version differs in its numbers from the
Massoretic text.
Besides the works indicted in the course of the articles, see
RAWLINSON, The Five Great Monarchies, II (London, 1862-7, 1878),
534-5; SCHRADER-WHITEHOUSE, The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the
Old Testament, I (London, 1885-8), 106-14; HOBERG, Genesis, 2nd
ed. (Freiburg, 1899), 129. For critical view, see SKINNER,
Genesis (New York, 1910, 228 sqq.
A.J. MAAS
Alexandre de Prouville, Marquis de Tracy
Alexandre De Prouville, Marquis de Tracy
Viceroy of New France, born in France, 1603, of noble parents;
died there in 1670. A soldier from his youth, he had proved his
valour in many battles and won the rank of lieutenant-general of
the king's armies. He was no less prudent and wise as a
negotiator and organizer. Entrusted by Louis XIV with a most
extensive mission and jurisdiction over all the French
possessions in the New World, he first redeemed Cayenne from the
Dutch, restored order to the Antilles, and reached Quebec in
1665. He had been preceded by the Carignan regiment which had
distinguished itself against the Turks in Hungary (1664) and was
entitled to bear the royal colours. With the concurrence of
Courcelles, the newly-appointed governor, and Talon, the famous
intendant, he inaugurated a glorious period in the history of
New France. To secure peace for the colony war was decided
against the Agniers, and in spite of his advanced age, Tracy
commanded the invading army. The year previous he had ordered
the construction of three forts on the Richelieu River,
including those of Sorel and Chambly. The enemies had fled from
their villages, which were destroyed, and Tracy returned with
nearly all his men. The humiliated Agniers sued for peace and
asked for missionaries to instruct them in the Faith. Tracy with
his two associates then devoted himself to the organization of
the courts of justice and to the promotion of agriculture and
industry. During his administration were imported the first
horses seen in Canada. Tracy's noble and conciliatory conduct
endeared him to the colonists and won the respect both of the
aborigines and of the authorities of New York. His
administration was marked by two chief events full of promise
for the prosperity of the colony: the abolition of the monopoly
of the West India company, which had replaced that of New
France, and the conclusion of a peace with the Iroquois which
lasted eighteen years and facilitated several brilliant
discoveries in the interior of the continent.
LIONEL LINDSAY
Tradition and Living Magisterium
Tradition and Living Magisterium
The word tradition (Greek paradosis in the ecclesiastical sense;
which is the only one in which it is used here; refers sometimes
to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one
generation to another sometimes to the organ or mode of the
transmission (kerigma ekklisiastikon, predicatio ecclesiastica).
In the first sense it is an old tradition that Jesus Christ was
born on 25 December, in the second sense tradition relates that
on the road to Calvary a pious woman wiped the face of Jesus. In
theological language, which in many circumstances has become
current, there is still greater precision and this in countless
directions. At first there was question only of traditions
claiming a Divine origin, but subsequently there arose questions
of oral as distinct from written tradition, in the sense that a
given doctrine or institution is not directly dependent on Holy
Scripture as its source but only on the oral teaching of Christ
or the Apostles. Finally with regard to the organ of tradition
it must be an official organ, a magisterium, or teaching
authority.
Now in this respect there are several points of controversy
between Catholics and every body of Protestants. Is all revealed
truth consigned to Holy Scripture? or can it, must it, be
admitted that Christ gave to His Apostles to be transmitted to
His Church, that the Apostles received either from the very lips
of Jesus or from inspiration or Revelation, Divine instructions
which they transmitted to the Church and which were not
committed to the inspired writings? Must it be admitted that
Christ instituted His Church as the official and authentic organ
to transmit and explain in virtue of Divine authority the
Revelation made to men? The Protestant principle is: The Bible
and nothing but the Bible; the Bible, according to them, is the
sole theological source; there are no revealed truths save the
truths contained in the Bible; according to them the Bible is
the sole rule of faith: by it and by it alone should all
dogmatic questions be solved; it is the only binding authority.
Catholics, on the other hand, hold that there may be, that there
is in fact, and that there must of necessity be certain revealed
truths apart from those contained in the Bible; they hold
furthermore that Jesus Christ has established in fact, and that
to adapt the means to the end He should have established, a
living organ as much to transmit Scripture and written
Revelation as to place revealed truth within reach of everyone
always and everywhere. Such are in this respect the two main
points of controversy between Catholics and so-called orthodox
Protestants (as distinguished from liberal Protestants, who
admit neither supernatural Revelation nor the authority of the
Bible). The other differences are connected with these or follow
from them, as also the differences between different Protestant
sects--according as they are more or less faithful to the
Protestant principle, they recede from or approach the Catholic
position.
Between Catholics and the Christian sects of the East there are
not the same fundamental differences, since both sides admit the
Divine institution and Divine authority of the Church with the
more or less living and explicit sense of its infallibility and
indefectibility and its other teaching prerogatives, but there
are contentions concerning the bearers of the authority, the
organic unity of the teaching body, the infallibility of the
pope, and the existence and nature of dogmatic development in
the transmission of revealed truth. Nevertheless the theology of
tradition does not consist altogether in controversy and
discussions with adversaries. Many questions arise in this
respect for every Catholic who wishes to give an exact account
of his belief and the principles he professes: What is the
precise relation between oral tradition and the revealed truths
in the Bible and that between the living magisterium and the
inspired Scriptures? May new truths enter the current of
tradition, and what is the part of the magisterium with regard
to revelations which God may yet make? How is this official
magisterium organized, and how is it to recognize a Divine
tradition or revealed truth? What is its proper role with regard
to tradition? Where and how are revealed truths preserved and
transmitted? What befalls the deposit of tradition in its
transmission through the ages? These and similar questions are
treated elsewhere in the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, but here we must
separate and group all that has reference to tradition and to
the living magisterium inasmuch as it is the organ of
preservation and transmission of traditional and revealed truth.
The following are the points to be treated:
I. The existence of Divine traditions not contained in Holy
Scripture, and the Divine institution of the living magisterium
to defend and transmit revealed truth and the prerogative of
this magisterium;
II. The relation of Scripture to the living magisterium, and of
the living magisterium to Scripture;
III. The proper mode of existence of revealed truth in the mind
of the Church and the way to recognize this truth;
IV. The organization and exercise of the living magisterium; its
precise role in the defence and transmission of revealed truth;
its limits, and modes of action;
V. The identity of revealed truth in the varieties of formulas,
systematization, and dogmatic development; the identity of faith
in the Church and through the variations of theology.
A full treatment of these questions would require a lengthy
development; here only a brief outline can be given, the reader
being referred to special works for a fuller explanation.
I. Divine Traditions not contained in Holy Scripture;
institution of the living magisterium; its prerogatives.
Luther's attacks on the Church were at first directed only
against doctrinal details, but the very authority of the Church
was involved in the dispute, and this soon became evident to
both sides. However the controversy continued for many years to
turn on particular points of traditional teaching rather than on
the teaching authority and the chief weapons were Biblical
texts. The Council of Trent, even while implying in its
decisions and anathemas the authority of the living magisterium
(which the Protestants themselves dared not explicitly deny),
while appealing to ecclesiastical tradition and the sense of the
Church either for the determination of the canon or for the
interpretation of some passages of Holy Scripture, even while
making a rule of interpretation in Biblical matters, did not
pronounce explicitly concerning the teaching authority,
contenting itself with saying that revealed truth is found in
the sacred books and in the unwritten traditions coming from God
through the Apostles; these were the sources from which it would
draw. The Council, as is evident, held that there are Divine
traditions not contained in Holy Scripture, revelations made to
the Apostles either orally by Jesus Christ or by the inspiration
of the Holy Ghost and transmitted by the Apostles to the Church.
Holy Scripture is therefore not the only theological source of
the Revelation made by God to His Church. Side by side with
Scripture there is tradition, side by side with the written
revelation there is the oral revelation. This granted, it is
impossible to be satisfied with the Bible alone for the solution
of all dogmatic questions. Such was the first field of
controversy between Catholic theologians and the Reformers. The
designation of unwritten Divine traditions was not always given
all the clearness desirable especially in early times; however
Catholic controversialists soon proved to the Protestants that
to be logical and consistent they must admit unwritten
traditions as revealed. Otherwise by what right did they rest on
Sunday and not on Saturday? How could they regard infant baptism
as valid, or baptism by infusion? How could they permit the
taking of an oath, since Christ had commanded that we swear not
at all? The Quakers were more logical in refusing all oaths, the
Anabaptists in re-baptizing adults, the Sabbatarians in resting
on Saturday. But none were so consistent as not to be open to
criticism on some point. Where is it indicated in the Bible that
the Bible is the sole source of faith? Going further, the
Catholic controversialists showed their opponents that of this
very Bible, to which alone they wished to refer, they could not
have the authentic canon nor even a sufficient guarantee without
an authority other than that of the Bible. Calvin parried the
blow by having recourse to a certain taste to which the Divine
word would manifest itself as such in the same way that honey is
recognized by the palate. And this in fact was the only
loophole, for Calvin recognized that no human authority was
acceptable in this matter. But this was a very subjective
criterion and one calling for caution. The Protestants dared not
adhere to it. They came eventually, after rejecting the Divine
tradition received from the Apostles by the infallible Church,
to rest their faith in the Bible only as a human authority,
which moreover was especially insufficient under the
circumstances, since it opened up all manner of doubts and
prepared the way for Biblical rationalism. There is not, in
fact, any sufficient guarantee for the canon of the Scriptures,
for the total inspiration or inerrancy of the Bible, save in a
Divine testimony which, not being contained in the Holy Books
with sufficient clearness and amplitude, nor being sufficiently
recognizable to the scrutiny of a scholar who is only a scholar,
does not reach us with the necessary warrant it would bear if
brought by a Divinely assisted authority, as is, according to
Catholics, the authority of the living magisterium of the
Church. Such is the way in which Catholics demonstrate to
Protestants that there should be and that there are in fact
Divine traditions not contained in Holy Writ.
In a similar way they show that they cannot dispense with a
teaching authority, a Divinely authorized living magistracy for
the solution of controversies arising among themselves and of
which the Bible itself was often the occasion. Indeed experience
proved that each man found in the Bible his own ideas, as was
said by one of the earliest reforming sectarians: "Hic liber est
in quo quaerit sua dogmata quisque, invenit et pariter dogmata
quisque sua." One man found the Real Presence, another a purely
symbolic presence, another some sort of efficacious presence.
The exercise of free inquiry with regard to Biblical texts led
to endless disputes, to doctrinal anarchy, and eventually to the
denial of all dogma. These disputes, anarchy, and denial could
not be according to the Divine intention. Hence the necessity of
a competent authority to solve controversies and interpret the
Bible. To say that the Bible was perfectly clear and sufficient
to all was obviously a retort born of desperation, a defiance of
experience and common sense. Catholics refuted it without
difficulty, and their position was amply justified when the
Protestants began compromising themselves with the civil power,
rejecting the doctrinal authority of the ecclesiastical
magisterium only to fall under that of princes.
Moreover it was enough to look at the Bible, to read it without
prejudice to see that the economy of the Christian preaching was
above all one of oral teaching. Christ preached, He did not
write. In His preaching He appealed to the Bible, but He was not
satisfied with the mere reading of it, He explained and
interpreted it, He made use of it in His teaching, but He did
not substitute it for His teaching. There is the example of the
mysterious traveller who explained to the disciples of Emmaus
what had reference to Him in the Scriptures to convince them
that Christ had to suffer and thus enter into His glory. And as
He preached Himself so He sent His Apostles to preach; He did
not commission them to write but to teach, and it was by oral
teaching and preaching that they instructed the nations and
brought them to the Faith. If some of them wrote and did so
under Divine inspiration it is manifest that this was as it were
incidentally. They did not write for the sake of writing, but to
supplement their oral teaching when they could not go themselves
to recall or explain it, to solve practical questions, etc. St.
Paul, who of all the Apostles wrote the most, did not dream of
writing everything nor of replacing his oral teaching by his
writings. Finally, the same texts which show us Christ
instituting His Church and the Apostles founding Churches and
spreading Christ's doctrine throughout the world show us at the
same time the Church instituted as a teaching authority; the
Apostles claimed for themselves this authority, sending others
as they had been sent by Christ and as Christ had been sent by
God, always with power to teach and to impose doctrine as well
as to govern the Church and to baptize. Whoever believed them
would be saved; whoever refused to believe them would be
condemned. It is the living Church and not Scripture that St.
Paul indicates as the pillar and the unshakable ground of truth.
And the inference of texts and facts is only what is exacted by
the nature of things. A book although Divine and inspired is not
intended to support itself. If it is obscure (and what
unprejudiced person will deny that there are obscurities in the
Bible?) it must be interpreted. And even if it is clear it does
not carry with it the guarantee of its Divinity, its
authenticity, or its value. Someone must bring it within reach
and no matter what be done the believer cannot believe in the
Bible nor find in it the object of his faith until he has
previously made an act of faith in the intermediary authorities
between the word of God and his reading. Now, authority for
authority, is it not better to have recourse to that of the
Church than to that of the first comer? Liberal Protestants,
such as M. Auguste Sabatier, have been the first to recognize
that, if there must be a religion of authority, the Catholic
system with the splendid organization of its living magisterium
is far superior to the Protestant system, which rests everything
on the authority of a book.
The prerogatives of this teaching authority are made
sufficiently clear by the texts and they are to a certain extent
implied in the very institution. The Church, according to St.
Paul's Epistle to Timothy, is the pillar and ground of truth;
the Apostles and consequently their successors have the right to
impose their doctrine; whosoever refuses to believe them shall
be condemned, whosoever rejects anything is shipwrecked in the
Faith. This authority is therefore infallible. And this
infallibility is guaranteed implicitly but directly by the
promise of the Saviour: "Behold I am with you all days even to
the consummation of the world." Briefly the Church continues
Christ in its mission to teach as in its mission to sanctify;
its power is the same as that which He received from His Father
and, as He came full of truth no less than of grace, the Church
is likewise an institution of truth as it is an institution of
grace. This doctrine was intended to be spread throughout the
world despite so many obstacles of every kind, and the
accomplishment of the task required miracles. So did Christ give
to his Apostles the miraculous power which guaranteed their
teaching. As He Himself confirmed His words by His works He
wished that they also should present with their doctrine
unexceptionable motives for credibility. Their miracles were the
Divine seals of their mission and their Apostolate. The Divine
seal has always been stamped on the teaching authority. It is
not necessary that every missionary should work miracles, the
Church herself is an ever-living miracle, bearing always on her
brow the unexceptionable witness that God is with her.
II. The relation of Scripture to the living magisterium, and of
the living magisterium to Scripture.
This relation is the same as that between the Gospel and the
Apostolic preaching. Christ made use of the Bible, He appealed
to it as to an irrefragable authority, He explained and
interpreted it and furnished the key to it, with it he shed
light on His own doctrine and mission. The Apostles did in like
manner when they spoke to the Jews. Both sides had access to the
Scriptures in a text admitted by all, both recognized in them a
Divine authority, as in the very word of God. This was also the
way of the faithful in their studies and discussions; but with
pagans and unbelievers it was necessary to begin with presenting
the Bible and guaranteeing its authority -- the Christian
doctrine concerning the Bible had to be explained to the
faithful themselves, and the guarantee of this doctrine
demonstrated. The Bible had been committed to the care of the
living magisterium. It was the Church's part to guard the Bible,
to present it to the faithful in authorized editions or accurate
translations, it was for her to make known the nature and value
of the Divine Book by declaring what she knew regarding its
inspiration and inerrancy, it was for her to supply the key by
explaining why and how it had been inspired, how it contained
Revelation, how the proper object of that Revelation was not
purely human instruction but a religious and moral doctrine with
a view to our supernatural destiny and the means to attain it,
how, the Old Testament being a preparation and annunciation of
the Messias and the new dispensation, there might be found
beneath the husk of the letter typical meanings, figures, and
prophecies. It was for the Church in consequence to determine
the authentic canon, to specify the special rules and conditions
for interpretation, to pronounce in case of doubt as to the
exact sense of a given book or text, and even when necessary to
safeguard the historical, prophetical, or apologetic value of a
given text or passage, to pronounce in certain questions of
authenticity, chronology, exegesis, or translation, either to
reject an opinion compromising the authority of the book or the
veracity of its doctrine or to maintain a given body of revealed
truth contained in a given text. It was above all for the Church
to circulate the Divine Book by minting its doctrine, adapting
and explaining it, by offering it and drawing from it
nourishment wherewith to nourish souls, briefly by supplementing
the book, making use of it, and assisting others to make use of
it. This is the debt of Scripture to the living magisterium.
On the other hand the living magisterium owes much to Scripture.
There it finds the word of God, new-blown so to speak, as it was
expressed under Divine agency by the inspired author; while oral
tradition, although faithfully transmitting revealed truth with
the Divine assistance, nevertheless transmits it only in human
formulas. Scripture gives us beyond doubt to a certain extent a
human expression of the truth which it presents, since this
truth is developed in and by a human brain acting in a human
manner, but also to a certain extent Divine, since this human
development takes place wholly under the action of God. So also
with due proportion it may be said of the inspired word what
Christ said of His: It is spirit and life. In a sense differing
from the Protestant sense which sometimes goes so far as to
deify the Bible, but, in a true sense, we admit that God speaks
to us in the Bible more directly than in oral teaching. The
latter, moreover, ever faithful to the recommendations which St.
Paul made to his disciple Timothy, does not fail to have
recourse to Biblical sources for its instruction and to draw
thence the heavenly doctrine, to take thence with the doctrine a
sure, ever-young, and ever-living expression of this doctrine,
one more adequate than any other despite the inevitable
inadaptability of human formulas to divine realities In the
hands of masters Scripture may become a sharp defensive and
offensive weapon against error and heresy. When a controversy
arises recourse is had first to the Bible. Frequently when
decisive texts are found masters wield them skilfully and in
such a way as to demonstrate their irresistible force. If none
are found of the necessary clearness the assistance of Scripture
is not thereby abandoned. Guided by the clear sense of the
living and luminous truth, which it bears within itself, by its
likeness to faith defended at need against error by the Divine
assistance, the living magisterium strives, explains, argues,
and occasionally subtilizes in order to bring forward texts
which, if they lack an independent and absolute value, have an
ad hominem force, or value, through the authority of the
authentic interpreter, whose very thought, if it is not, or is
not clearly, in Scripture, nevertheless stands forth with a
distinctness or new clearness in this manipulation of Scripture,
by this contact with it.
Manifestly there is no question here of a meaning which is not
in Scripture and which the magisterium reads into it by imposing
it as the Biblical meaning. This individual writers may do and
have sometimes done, for they are not infallible as individuals,
but not the authentic magisterium. There is question only of the
advantage which the living magisterium draws from Scripture
whether to attain a clearer consciousness of its own thought, to
formulate it in hieratic terms, or to triumphantly reject an
opinion favourable to error or heresy. As regards Biblical
interpretation properly so called the Church is infallible in
the sense that, whether by authentic decision of pope or
council, or by its current teaching that a given passage of
Scripture has a certain meaning, this meaning must be regarded
as the true sense of the passage in question. It claims this
power of infallible interpretation only in matters of faith and
morals, that is where religious or moral truth is in danger,
directly, if the text or passage belongs to the moral and
religious order; indirectly, if in assigning a meaning to a text
or book the veracity of the Bible, its moral value, or the dogma
of its inspiration or inerrancy is imperilled. Without going
further into the manifold services which the Bible renders to
the living magisterium mention must nevertheless be made as
particularly important of its services in the apologetic order.
In fact Scripture by its historic value, which is indisputable
and undisputed on many points, furnishes the apologist with
irrefragable arguments in support of supernatural religion. It
contains for example miracles whose reality is impressed on the
historian with the same certainty as the most acknowledged
facts. This is true and perhaps more strikingly so of the
argument from the prophecies, for the Scriptures, the Old as
well as the New Testament, contain manifest prophecies, the
fulfilment of which we behold either in Christ and His Apostles
or in the later development of the Christian religion.
In view of all this it will be readily understood that since the
time of St. Paul the Church has urgently recommended to her
ministers the study of Holy Scripture, that she has watched with
a jealous authority over its integral transmission, its exact
translation, and its faithful interpretation If occasionally she
has seemed to restrict its use or its diffusion this too was
through an easily comprehensible love and a particular esteem
for the Bible, that the sacred Book might not like a profane
book be made a ground for curiosity, endless discussions, and
abuses of every kind. In short, since the Church at last proves
to be the best safeguard for human reason against the excesses
of an unbridled reason, so by the very avowal of sincere
Protestants does she show herself at the present day the best
defender of the Bible against an unrestrained Biblicism or an
unchecked criticism.
III. The proper mode of existence of revealed truth in the mind
of the Church and the way to recognize this truth.
There is a formula current in Christian teaching (and the
formula is borrowed from St. Paul himself) that traditional
truth was confided to the Church as a deposit which it would
guard and faithfully transmit as it had received it without
adding to it or taking anything away. This formula expresses
very well one of the aspects of tradition and one of the
principal roles of the living magisterium. But this idea of a
deposit should not make us lose sight of the true manner in
which traditional truth lives and is transmitted in the Church.
This deposit in fact is not an inanimate thing passed from hand
to hand; it is not, properly speaking, an assemblage of
doctrines and institutions consigned to books or other
monuments. Books and monuments of every kind are a means, an
organ of transmission, they are not, properly speaking, the
tradition itself. To better understand the latter it must be
represented as a current of life and truth coming from God
through Christ and through the Apostles to the last of the
faithful who repeats his creed and learns his catechism. This
conception of tradition is not always clear to all at the first
glance. It must be reached, however, if we wish to form a clear
and exact idea. We can endeavour to explain it to ourselves in
the following manner: We are all conscious of an assemblage of
ideas or opinions living in our mind and forming part of the
very life of our mind, sometimes they find their clear
expression, again we find ourselves without the exact formula
wherewith to express them to ourselves or to others an idea is
in search as it were of its expression, sometimes it even acts
in us and leads us to actions without our having as yet the
reflective consciousness of it. Something similar may be said of
the ideas or opinions which live, as it were, and stir the
social sentiment of a people, a family, or any other
well-characterized group to form what is called the spirit of
the day, the spirit of a family, or the spirit of a people.
This common sentiment is in a sense nothing else than the sum of
individual sentiments, and yet we feel clearly that it is quite
another thing than the individual taken individually. It is a
fact of experience that there is a common sentiment, as if there
were such a thing as a common spirit, and as if this common
spirit were the abode of certain ideas and opinions which are
doubtless the ideas and opinions of each man, but which take on
a peculiar aspect in each man inasmuch as they are the ideas and
opinions of all. The existence of tradition in the Church must
be regarded as living in the spirit and the heart, thence
translating itself into acts, and expressing itself in words or
writings; but here we must not have in mind individual
sentiment, but the common sentiment of the Church, the sense or
sentiment of the faithful, that is, of all who live by its life
and are in communion of thought among themselves and with her.
The living idea is the idea of all, it is the idea of
individuals, not merely inasmuch as they are individuals, but
inasmuch as they form part of the same social body. This
sentiment of the Church is peculiar in this, that it is itself
under the influence of grace. Hence it follows that it is not
subject, like that of other human groups to error and
thoughtless or culpable tendencies. The Spirit of God always
living in His Church upholds the sense of revealed truth ever
living therein.
Documents of all kinds (writings, monuments, etc.) are in the
hands of masters, as of the faithful, a means of finding or
recognizing the revealed truth confided to the Church under the
direction of her pastors. There is between written documents and
the living magisterium of the Church a relation similar,
proportionately speaking, to that already outlined between
Scripture and the living magisterium. In them is found the
traditional thought expressed according to varieties of
environments and circumstances, no longer in an inspired
language, as is the case with Scripture, but in a purely human
language, consequently subject to the imperfections and
shortcomings of human thought. Nevertheless the more the
documents are the exact expression of the living thought of the
Church the more they thereby possess the value and authority
which belong to that thought because they are so much the better
expression of tradition. Often formulas of the past have
themselves entered the traditional current and become the
official formulas of the Church. Hence it will be understood
that the living magisterium searches in the past, now for
authorities in favour of its present thought in order to defend
it against attacks or dangers of mutilation, now for light to
walk the right road without straying. The thought of the Church
is essentially a traditional thought and the living magisterium
by taking cognizance of ancient formulas of this thought thereby
recruits its strength and prepares to give to immutable truth a
new expression which shall be in harmony with the circumstances
of the day and within reach of contemporary minds. Revealed
truth has sometimes found definitive formulas from the earliest
times; then the living magisterium has only had to preserve and
explain them and put them in circulation. Sometimes attempts
have been made to express this truth, without success. It even
happens that, in attempting to express revealed truth in the
terms of some philosophy or to fuse it with some current of
human thought, it has been distorted so as to be scarcely
recognizable, so closely mingled with error that it becomes
difficult to separate them. When the Church studies the ancient
monuments of her faith she casts over the past the reflection of
her living and present thought and by some sympathy of the truth
of to-day with that of yesterday she succeeds in recognizing
through the obscurities and inaccuracies of ancient formulas the
portions of traditional truth, even when they are mixed with
error. The Church is also (as regards religious and moral
doctrines) the best interpreter of truly traditional documents;
she recognizes as by instinct what belongs to the current of her
living thought and distinguishes it from the foreign elements
which may have become mixed with it in the course of centuries.
The living magisterium, therefore, makes extensive use of
documents of the past, but it does so while judging and
interpreting, gladly finding in them its present thought, but
likewise, when needful, distinguishing its present thought from
what is traditional only in appearance. It is revealed truth
always living in the mind of the Church, or, if it is preferred,
the present thought of the Church in continuity with her
traditional thought, which is for it the final criterion,
according to which the living magisterium adopts as true or
rejects as false the often obscure and confused formulas which
occur in the monuments of the past. Thus are explained both her
respect for the writings of the Fathers of the Church and her
supreme independence towards those writings--she judges them
more than she is judged by them. Harnack has said that the
Church is accustomed to conceal her evolution and to efface as
well as she can the differences between her present and her
former thought by condemning as heretical the most faithful
witnesses of what was formerly orthodoxy. Not understanding what
tradition is, the ever-living thought of the Church, he believes
that she abjured her past when she merely distinguished between
what was traditional truth in the past and what was only human
alloy mixed with that truth, the personal opinion of an author
substituting itself for the general thought of the Christian
community. With regard to official documents, the expression of
the infallible magisterium of the Church embodied in the
decision of councils, or the solemn judgments of the popes, the
Church never gainsays what she has once decided. She is then
linked with her past because in this past her entire self is
concerned and not any fallible organ of her thought. Hence she
still finds her doctrine and rule of faith in these venerable
monuments; the formulas may have grown old, but the truth which
they express is always her present thought.
IV. The organization and exercise of the living magisterium; its
precise role in the defence and transmission of revealed
truth--its limits and modes of action.
Closer study of the living magisterium will enable us to better
understand the splendid organism created by God and gradually
developed that it might preserve, transmit, and bring within the
reach of all revealed truth, ever the same, but adapted to every
variety of time, circumstances, and environment. Properly
speaking, this magisterium is a teaching authority; it not only
presents the truth, but it has the right to impose it, since its
power is the very power given by God to Christ and by Christ to
His Church. This authority is called the teaching Church. The
teaching Church is essentially composed of the episcopal body,
which continues here below the work and mission of the Apostolic
College. It was indeed in the form of a college or social body
that Christ grouped His Apostles and it is likewise as a social
body that the episcopate exercises its mission to teach.
Doctrinal infallibility has been guaranteed to the episcopal
body and to the head of that body as it was guaranteed to the
Apostles, with this difference, however, between the Apostles
and the bishops that each Apostle was personally infallible (in
virtue of his extraordinary mission as founder and the plenitude
of the Holy Ghost received on Pentecost by the Twelve and later
communicated to St. Paul as to the Twelve), whereas only the
body of bishops is infallible and each bishop is not so, save in
proportion as he teaches in communion and concert with the
entire episcopal body.
At the head of this episcopal body is the supreme authority of
the Roman pontiff, the successor of St. Peter in his primacy as
he is his successor in his see. As supreme authority in the
teaching body, which is infallible, he himself is infallible.
The episcopal body is infallible also, but only in union with
its head, from whom moreover it may not separate, since to do so
would be to separate from the foundation on which the Church is
built. The authority of the pope may be exercised without the
co-operation of the bishops, and this even in infallible
decisions which both bishops and faithful are bound to receive
with the same submission. The authority of the bishops may be
exercised in two ways; now each bishop teaches the flock
confided to him, again the bishops assemble in council to draw
up together and pass doctrinal or disciplinary decrees. When all
the bishops of the Catholic world (this totality is to be
understood as morally speaking; it suffices for the whole Church
to be represented) are thus assembled in council the council is
called oecumenical. The doctrinal decrees of an oecumenical
council, once they are approved by the pope, are infallible as
are the ex cathedra definitions of the sovereign pontiff.
Although the bishops, taken individually, are not infallible
their teaching participates in the infallibility of the Church
according as they teach in concert and in union with the
episcopal body, that is according as they express not their
personal ideas, but the very thought of the Church.
Beside the sovereign pontiff are the Roman Congregations, many
of which are especially concerned with doctrinal questions. Some
of them, such as the Congregation of the Index, are not so
concerned save from a disciplinary standpoint, by prohibiting
the reading of certain books, regarded as dangerous to faith or
morals, if not by the very doctrine which they contain, at least
by their way of expressing it or by their unseasonableness.
Other congregations, that of the Inquisition, for example, have
a more directly doctrinal authority. This authority is never
infallible; it is nevertheless binding and exacts a religious
submission, interior as well as exterior. Nevertheless this
interior submission does not necessarily bear on the absolute
truth or falsity of the doctrine concerned in the decree, it may
only bear on the safety or danger of a certain teaching or
opinion, the decree itself usually having in view only the moral
qualification of the doctrine. To assist them in their doctrinal
task the bishops have all those who teach by their authority or
under their surveillance; pastors and curates, professors in
ecclesiastical establishments, in a word, all who teach or
explain Christian doctrine.
Theological teaching in all its forms (in seminaries,
universities, etc.) gives valuable assistance as a whole to the
teaching authority and to all who teach under that authority. In
the study of theology the masters themselves have acquired the
knowledge which usually assists them to discern truth or
falsehood in doctrinal matters, they have drawn thence what they
themselves are to provide. Theologians as such do not form a
part of the teaching Church, but as professional expounders of
revealed truth they study it scientifically, they collect and
systematize it, they illumine it with all the lights of
philosophy, history, etc. They are, as it were, the natural
consultors of the teaching authority, to furnish it with the
necessary information and data; they thereby prepare and
sometimes in an even more direct manner by their reports, their
written consultations, their projects or schemata, and their
preparatory redactions the official documents which the teaching
authority completely develops and publishes authoritatively. On
the other hand, their scientific works are useful for the
instruction of those who should spread and popularize the
doctrine, put it in circulation, and adapt it to all by speech
or writings of every kind. It is evident what marvellous unity
is attained on this point alone in ecclesiastical teaching and
how the same truth, descended from above, distributed through a
thousand different channels, finally comes pure and undefiled to
the most lowly and the most ignorant.
This multifarious work, of scientific exposition as well as of
popularization and propaganda, is likewise assisted by the
countless written forms of religious teaching, among which
catechisms have a special character of doctrinal security,
approved as they are by the teaching authority and claiming only
to set forth with clearness and precision the teaching common in
the Church. Thus the child who learns his catechism may,
provided he is informed of it, take cognizance that the doctrine
presented to him is not the personal opinion of the volunteer
catechist or of the priest who communicates it to him. The
catechism is the same in all the parishes of a diocese, apart
from a few differences of detail which have no bearing on
doctrine all the catechisms of a country are alike; the
differences between those of one country and another are
scarcely perceptible. It is truly the mind of the Church
received from God or Christ and transmitted by the Apostles to
the Christian society which thus reaches even little children by
the voice of the catechist, or the savage by that of the
missionary. This diffusion of the same truth throughout the
world and this unity of the same faith among the most diverse
peoples is a marvel which by itself forces the recognition that
God is with His Church. St. Irenaeus in his time was in
admiration of it and he expressed his admiration in language of
such brilliancy and poetry as is seldom to be met with in the
venerable Bishop of Lyons. The outer and visible cause of its
diffusion and unity is the splendid organization of the living
magisterium. This magisterium was not instituted to receive new
truths, but to guard, transmit, propagate, and preserve revealed
truth from every admixture of error, and to cause it to prevail.
Moreover the magisterium should not be considered as external to
the community of the faithful. Those who teach cannot and should
not teach save what they have learned themselves, those who have
the office of teachers have been chosen from among the faithful
and they first of all are obliged to believe what they propose
to the faith of others. Moreover they usually propose to the
belief of the faithful only the truths of which the latter have
already made more or less explicit profession. Sometimes it is
even by sounding as it were the common sentiment of the Church,
still more by scrutinizing the monuments of the past, that
masters and theologians discover that such and such a doctrine,
perhaps in dispute, belongs nevertheless to the traditional
deposit. More than one among the faithful may be unconscious of
personal belief in it, but if he is in union of thought with the
Church he believes implicitly that which perhaps he declines to
recognize explicitly as an object of his faith. It was thus with
regard to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception before it was
inserted in the explicit faith of the Church.
Hence there is between the teaching Church and the faithful an
intimate union of thought and heart. The teaching authority
loses nothing of its rights; these are limited only from above
by the very conditions of the command which they have received.
But the exercise of this authority is by so much more certain
and easy as the faithful, generally, so to speak, confirm by
their adhesion the decisions of this authority: a dogmatic
definition scarcely does more than sanction the faith already
existing in the Christian community. The better to understand,
adapt, and preserve revealed truth against attacks or errors the
masters in the Church and the professors of theology naturally
appeal to all the resources offered by human science. Among
these sciences philosophy, history, languages, philology in all
its forms necessarily have an important place in the arsenal of
the teaching magisterium. With regard to theological
systematization in particular, philosophy necessarily intervenes
to assist theology better to comprehend revealed truth, the
better to synthesize traditional data, and the better to explain
the dogmatic idea. In the Middle Ages a fruitful alliance was
formed between Scholastic philosophy and theology. It may happen
that philosophy and the other human sciences are at variance
with theology, the science of revealed truth. The conflict is
never insoluble, for the true can never be opposed to the true,
nor the human truth of philosophy and human knowledge to the
supernatural truth of theology. But the fact remains that
scientific hypothesis, science which seeks itself, and
philosophy which develops itself sometimes seem in opposition to
revealed truth. In this case the teaching Church has the right,
in order to preserve traditional truth, to condemn the
assertions, opinions, and hypotheses which, although not direct
denials, nevertheless endanger it or rather expose some souls to
the loss of it. Authority has need to be prudent in these
condemnations and it is well known that the cases are very rare
when it may be asserted with any appearance of justification
that it has not been sufficiently so, but its right to interfere
is indisputable for anyone who admits the Divine institution of
the magisterium.
There are then between purely profane facts and opinions and
revealed truths mixed facts and opinions which by their nature
belong to the human order, but which are in intimate contact and
close connexion with supernatural truth. These facts are called
dogmatic facts and these opinions theological opinions. In very
virtue of its mission the teaching authority has jurisdiction
over these facts and opinions; it is even a positive truth, if
not a revealed truth, that dogmatic facts and theological
opinions may also like dogmatic truths themselves be the object
of an infallible decision. The Church is no less infallible in
maintaining that the five famous propositions are in Jansenism
than in condemning these propositions as heretical. A
distinction must be made between dogmatic traditions or revealed
truths, pious traditions, liturgical customs, and the accounts
of supernatural manifestations or revelations which circulate in
the world of Christian piety. When the Church intervenes in
order to pronounce in these matters it is never to canonize
them, if we may so speak, nor to give them an authority of
faith; in such cases it claims only to preserve them against
temerarious attacks, to pronounce that they contain nothing
contrary to faith or morals, and to recognize in them a human
value sufficient for piety to nourish itself therewith freely
and without danger.
V. The identity of revealed truth in the varieties of formulas,
systematization, and dogmatic development, the identity of faith
in the Church and through the variations of theology.
The saying of Sully Prud'homme is well known, "How is it that
this which is so complicated (the 'Summa' of St. Thomas) has
proceeded from what was so simple (the Gospel)?" In fact when we
read a theological treatise or the profession of faith and
anti-Modernist oath imposed by Pius X they seem at first glance
very different from the Holy Scripture or the Apostles' Creed.
On closer study we become aware that the differences are not
irreconcilable; despite appearances the "Summa" and the
anti-Modernist oath are naturally linked with the Scripture and
the faith of the first Christians. To grasp thoroughly the
identity of revealed truth such as was believed in the early
centuries with the dogmas which we now profess, it is necessary
to study thoroughly the process of dogmatic expression in the
complete history of dogma and theology. It is sufficient here to
indicate its general outlines and characteristics. That which
was shown in Scripture or the Evangelic Revelation as a living
reality (the Divine Person of Jesus Christ) has been formulated
in abstract terms (one person, two natures) or in concrete
formulas (my Father and I are one); men passed constantly from
the implicit seen or received to the explicit reasoned and
reflected upon; they analyzed the complex data, compared the
separate elements, built up a system of the scattered truths;
they cleared up by analogies of faith and the light of reason
points which were still obscure and fused them into a whole, in
whose parts the data of Divine Revelation and those of human
knowledge were sometimes difficult to distinguish. Briefly all
this led to a work of transposition, analysis, and synthesis, of
deduction and induction, of the elaboration of the revealed
matter by theology. In the course of this work the formulas have
changed, the Divine realities have become tinged with the
colours of human thought, revealed truths have been mingled with
those of science and philosophy, but the heavenly doctrine has
remained the same throughout the varieties of formulas,
systematization, and dogmatic expression. It is seen at
different angles and to a certain extent with other eyes, but it
is the same truth which was presented to the first Christians
and which is presented to us to-day.
To this identity of revealed truth corresponds the identity of
faith. What the first Christians believed we still believe; what
we believe to-day they believed more or less explicitly, in a
more or less conscious way. Since the deposit of Revelation has
remained the same, the same also, in substance, has remained the
taking possession of the deposit by the living faith. Each of
the faithful has not at all times nor has he always explicit
consciousness of all that he believes, but his implicit belief
always contains what he one day makes explicit in the profession
of faith. Certain truths, which may be called fundamental, have
always been explicitly professed in the Church either by word or
action; others which may be called secondary may have long
remained implicit, enveloped, as regards their precise detail,
in a more general truth where faith did not discern them at the
first glance. In the first case at a given time uncertainties
may have existed, controversies have arisen, heresies cropped
up. But the mind of the Church, the Catholic sense, has not
hesitated as to what was essential, there has never been in the
Christian world that darkening of the truth with which heretics
have reproached it; these might have seen and they who had eyes
to see did see. On these points disputes have never arisen among
the faithful; there have sometimes been very sharp disputes, but
they had to do with misunderstandings or bore only on details of
expression.
As regards truths such as the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception, there have been uncertainties and controversies over
the very substance of the subjects involved. The revealed truth
was indeed in the deposit of truth in the Church, but it was not
formulated in explicit terms nor even in clearly equivalent
terms; it was enveloped in a more general truth (that e. g. of
the all-holiness of Mary), the formula of which might be
understood in a more or less absolute sense (exemption from all
actual sin, exemption even from original sin). On the other
hand, this truth (the exemption of Mary from original sin) may
seem in at least apparent conflict with other certain truths
(universality of original sin, redemption of all by Christ). It
will be readily understood that in some circumstances, when the
question is put explicitly for the first time, the faithful have
hesitated. It is even natural that the theologians should show
more hesitation than the other faithful. More aware of the
apparent opposition between the new opinion and the ancient
truth, they may legitimately resist, while awaiting fuller
light, what may seem to them unreflecting haste or unenlightened
piety. Thus did St. Anselm, St. Thomas, and St. Bonaventure in
the case of the Immaculate Conception. But the living idea of
Mary in the mind of the Church implied absolute exemption from
all sin without exception, even from original sin; the faithful
whom theological preoccupations did not prevent from beholding
this idea in its purity, with that intuition of the heart often
more prompt and more enlightened than reasoning and reflected
thought, shrank from all restriction and could not suffer,
according to the expression of St. Augustine, that there should
be question of any sin whatsoever in connexion with Mary. Little
by little the feeling of the faithful won the day. Not, as has
been said, because the theologians, powerless to struggle
against a blind sentiment, had themselves to follow the
movement, but because their perceptions, quickened by the
faithful and by their own instinct of faith, grew more
considerate of the sentiment of the faithful and eventually
examined the new opinion more closely in order to make sure
that, far from contradicting any dogma, it harmonized
wonderfully with other revealed truths and corresponded as a
whole to the analogy of faith and rational fitness. Finally
scrutinizing with fresh care the deposit of revelation, they
there discovered the pious opinion, hitherto concealed, as far
as they were concerned in the more general formula, and, not
satisfied to hold it as true, they declared it revealed. Thus to
implicit faith in a revealed truth succeeded, after long
discussions, explicit faith in the same truth thenceforth
shining in the sight of all. There have been no new data, but
there has been under the impulse of grace and sentiment and the
effort of theology a more distinct and clear insight into what
the ancient data contained. When the Church defined the
Immaculate Conception it defined what was actually in the
explicit faith of the faithful what had always been implicitly
in that faith. The same is true of all similar cases, save for
accidental differences of circumstances. In recognizing a new
truth the Church thereby recognizes that it already possessed
that truth.
There is, therefore in the Church progress of dogma, progress of
theology, progress to a certain extent of faith itself, but this
progress does not consist in the addition of fresh information
nor the change of ideas. What is believed has always been
believed, but in time it is more commonly and thoroughly
understood and explicitly expressed. Thus, thanks to the living
magisterium and ecclesiastical preaching, thanks to the living
sense of truth in the Church, to the action of the Holy Ghost
simultaneously directing master and faithful, traditional truth
lives and develops in the Church, always the same, at once
ancient and new--ancient, for the first Christians already
beheld it to a certain extent, new, because we see it with our
own eyes and in harmony with our present ideas. Such is the
notion of tradition in the double meaning of the word; it is
Divine truth coming down to us in the mind of the Church and it
is the guardianship and transmission of this Divine truth by the
organ of the living magisterium, by ecclesiastical preaching, by
the profession of it made by all in the Christian life.
JEAN BAINVEL
Traditionalism
Traditionalism
A philosophical system which makes tradition the supreme
criterion and rule of certitude.
Exposition
According to traditionalism, human reason is of itself radically
unable to know with certainty any truth or, at least, the
fundamental truths of the metaphysical, moral, and religious
order. Hence our first act of knowledge must be an act of faith,
based on the authority of revelation. This revelation is
transmitted to us through society, and its truth is guaranteed
by tradition or the general consent of mankind. Such is the
philosophical system maintained chiefly, in its absolute form,
by the Vicomte de Bonald and F. de Lamennais in their respective
works and, with some mitigation, by Bautain, Bonetty, Ventura,
Ubaghs, and the school of Louvain.
According to de Bonald, man is essentially a social being. His
development comes through society; and the continuity and
progress of society have their principle in tradition. Now
language is the instrument of sociability, and speech is as
natural to man as is his social nature itself. Language could
not have been discovered by man, for "man needs signs or words
in order to think as well as in order to speak"; that is "man
thinks his verbal expression before he verbally expresses his
thought"; but originally language, in its fundamental elements
together with the thoughts which it expresses, was given him by
God His Creator (cf. Legislation primitive, I, ii). These
fundamental truths, absolutely necessary to the intellectual,
moral, and religious life of man, must be first accepted by
faith. They are communicated through society and education, and
warranted by tradition or universal reason of mankind. There is
no other basis for certitude and there remains nothing, besides
tradition, but human opinions, contradiction, and uncertainty
(cf. Recherches philosophiques, i, ix).
The system presented by Lamennais is almost identical with that
of de Bonald. Our instruments of knowledge, namely sense,
feeling, and reason, he says, are fallible. The rule of
certitude therefore can only be external to man and it can
consist only in the control of the individual senses, feelings,
and reasoning by the testimony of the senses, feelings, and
reason of all other men; their universal agreement is the rule
of certitude. Hence, to avoid scepticism, we must begin with an
act of faith preceding all reflection, since reflection
pre-supposes the knowledge of some truth. This act of faith must
have its criterion and rule in the common consent or agreement
of all, in the general reason (la raison generale). "Such is",
Lamennais concludes, "the law of human nature", outside of which
"there is no certitude, no language no society, no life" (cf.
Defense de l'Essai sur l'Indifference, xi).
The Mitigated Traditionalists make a distinction between the
order of acquisition (ordo acquisitionis) and the order of
demonstration (ordo demonstrationis). The knowledge of
metaphysical truths, they say, is absolutely necessary to man in
order to act reasonably. It must then be acquired by the child
through teaching or tradition before he can use his reason. And
this tradition can have its source only in a primitive
revelation. Hence, in the order of acquisition, faith precedes
science. With these truths, however, received by faith, human
reason is able, through reflection, to demonstrate the
reasonableness of this act of faith, and thus, in the order of
demonstration, science precedes faith. When replaced in its
historical surroundings, Traditionalism clearly appears as a
reaction and a protest against the rationalism of the
philosophers of the eighteenth century and the anarchic
individualism of the French Revolution. Against these errors it
pointed out and emphasized the weakness and insufficiency of
human reason, the influence of society, education, and tradition
on the development of human life and institutions. The reaction
was extreme, and landed in the opposite error.
Criticism
Since Traditionalism, in its fundamental principles, is a kind
of Fideism, it falls under the condemnation pronounced by the
Church and under the refutation furnished by reason and
philosophy against Fideism. We may, however, advance certain
criticisms touching the characteristic elements of
Traditionalism. It is evident, first of all, that authority,
whatever be the way or agency in which it is presented to us,
cannot of itself be the supreme criterion or rule of certitude.
For, in order to be a rule of certitude, it must first be known
as valid, competent, and legitimate, and reason must have
ascertained this before it is entitled to our assent (cf. St.
Thomas, I-II:2:1). Without entering upon the psychological
problem of the relations between thought and expression, and
even admitting with de Bonald that the primitive elements of
thought and language were originally given directly by God to
man, we are not forced to conclude logically with him that our
first act is an act of faith. Our first act should rather be an
act of reason, acknowledging, by natural reflection, the
credibility of the truths revealed by God. Lamennais's criterion
of universal reason or consent is open to the same objections.
First, how could universal consent or general reason, which is
nothing more than the collection of individual judgments or of
individual reasons, give certitude, when each of these
individual judgments is only matter of opinion or each of these
individual reasons is declared to be fallible? Again, how could
we in practice apply such a criterion, that is, how could we
ascertain the universality of such a judgment in the whole human
race, even if only moral universality were required? Moreover,
what would be, in this system, the criterion of truth,
concerning matters in which the human mind is not generally
interested, or in the scientific problems of which it is
generally incompetent? But above all, in order to give a firm
and unhesitating assent to the teaching of universal consent, we
must first have ascertained the reasonableness and legitimacy of
its claims to our assent; that is, reason must ultimately
precede faith, otherwise our assent would not be reasonable.
Mitigated or Semi-Traditionalism, in spite of its apparent
differences, is substantially identical with pure
Traditionalism, and falls under the same criticism, since
religious and moral truths are declared to be given to man
directly by Revelation and accepted by him antecedently to any
act of his reason. Moreover, there is no real foundation for the
essential distinction between the orders of invention and
demonstration, which is supposed to distinguish
Semi-Traditionalism from pure Traditionalism. The difference
between these two orders is only accidental. It consists in the
fact that it is easier to demonstrate a truth already known than
to discover it for the first time; but the faculties and process
used in both operations are essentially the same, since to
demonstrate a truth already known is simply to reproduce, under
the guidance of this knowledge, the operation performed and to
take again the path followed in its first discovery (cf. St.
Thomas, "De Veritate", Q. xi, a. 1). Semi-Traditionalism and
absolute Traditionalism, then, rest upon the same fundamental
error, namely, that ultimately faith precedes reason. Let us
point out, however, the partial truth contained in
Traditionalism. Against Individualism and Rationalism, it
rightly insisted upon the social character of man, and rightly
maintained that authority and education play a large part in the
intellectual, moral, and religious development of man. Rightly
also it recalled to the human mind the necessity of respect for
tradition, for the experience and teaching it contains, to
secure a true and solid progress Universal consent may indeed
be, in certain conditions; a criterion of truth. In many
circumstances, it may furnish suggestion for the discovery of
truth or afford confirmation of the truth already discovered,
but it can never be the supreme criterion and rule of truth.
Unless we admit that our reason is of itself capable of knowing
with certainty some fundamental truths, we logically end in
scepticism-the ruin of both human knowledge and faith. The true
doctrine, as taught by the Catholic Church and confirmed by
psychology and history, is that man is physically and
practically able to know with certainty some fundamental truths
of the natural, moral, and religious order, but that, although
he has the physical power, he remains in the conditions of the
present life, morally and practically incapable of knowing
sufficiently all the truths of the moral and religious order,
without the help of Divine Revelation (cf. Vatican Council,
Sess. III, cap. ii).
GEORGE M. SAUVAGE
Traducianism
Traducianism
Traducianism (tradux, a shoot or sprout, and more specifically a
vine branch made to take root so as to propagate the vine), in
general the doctrine that, in the process of generation, the
human spiritual soul is transmitted to the offspring by the
parents. When a distinction is made between the terms
Traducianism and Generationism, the former denotes the
materialistic doctrine of the transmission of the soul by the
organic process of generation, while the latter applies to the
doctrine according to which the soul of the offspring originates
from the parental soul in some mysterious way analogous to that
in which the organism originates from the parent's organism.
Traducianism is opposed to Creationism or the doctrine that
every soul is created by God. Both, however, against
Emanationism and Evolutionism (q.v.) admit that the first human
soul originated by creation. They differ only as to the mode of
origin of subsequent souls.
In the early centuries of the Christian Church, the Fathers who
touch upon this question defend the immediate creation of the
soul. Tertullian, Apollinaris, and a few other heretics advocate
Traducianism, but the testimony of Saint Jerome (Epist. cxxvi,
1) that "the majority of Oriental writers think that, as the
body is born of the body, so the soul is born of the soul" seems
exaggerated, as no other writer of prominence is found to
advocate Generationism as certain. Saint Gregory of Nyssa,
Macarius, Rufinus, Nemesius, although their views on this point
are not always clear, seem to prefer Generationism. After the
rise of Pelagianism, some Fathers hesitate between Generationism
and Creationism, thinking that the former offers a better, if
not the only, explanation of the transmission of original sin.
Among them Saint Augustine is the most important. Creationism is
held as certain by the Scholastics, with the exception of Hugh
of Saint Victor and Alexander of Hales, who propose it merely as
more probable. In recent times Generationism has been rejected
by all Catholic theologians. Exceptions are Froschammer who
defends Generationism and gives to the generation of the soul
from the parents the name of secondary creation; Klee and Ubaghs
who leave the question undecided; Hermes who favours
Generationism; Gravina who advocates it- and Rosmini who asserts
that the sensitive soul is generated by the parents, and becomes
spiritual when God illuminates it and manifests to it the idea
of being which is the foundation of the whole intellectual life.
From the philosophical point of view, the reasons alleged in
favour of Generationism have little or no value. The parents are
really generators of their offspring even if the soul comes from
God, for the generative process is the condition of the union of
body and soul which constitutes the human being. A murderer
really kills a man, although he does not destroy his soul. Nor
is man inferior to animals because they generate complete living
organisms, since the difference between man and animals comes
from the superiority of the human soul and from its spiritual
nature which requires that it should be created by God. On the
other hand the reasons against Generationism are cogent. The
organic process of generation cannot give rise to a spiritual
substance, and to. say that the soul is transmitted in the
corporeal semen is to make it intrinsically dependent on matter.
The process of spiritual generation is impossible. since the
soul is immaterial and indivisible, no spiritual germ can be
detached from the Parental soul (cf. St. Thomas, "Contra gent."
II, c 86; "Sum. theol." I:90:2, I:98:2, etc.). As to the power
of creation, it is the prerogative of God alone (see CREATION,
VI).
Theologically, corporeal Traducianism is heretical because it
goes directly against the spirituality of the soul. As to
Generationism, it is certainly opposed to the general attitude
of the Church. Froschammer's book, "Ueber den Ursprung der
menschlichen Seelen", was condemned in 1857, and Ubaghs's
opinion expressed in his "Anthropologiae philosophicae elementa"
was reproved in a letter of Cardinal Patrizi written by
authority of Pius IX to the Archbishop of Mechlin (2 March,
1866). Moreover, Anastasius II in a letter to the bishops of
Gaul (498) condemns Generationism (Thiel, "Epistolae Romanorum
Pontificum", 634 sqq.). In the Symbol to be subscribed to by
Bishop Peter of Antioch (1053), Leo IX declares the soul to be
"not a part of God, but created from nothing" (Denzinger, 348).
Among the errors which the Armenians must reject, Benedict XII
mentions the doctrine that the soul originates from the soul of
the father (Denzinger, 533). Hence, although there are no strict
definitions condemning Generationism as heretical, it is
certainly opposed to the doctrine of the Church, and could not
be held without temerity.
C. A. DUBRAY
Trajan
Trajan
Emperor of Rome (A.D. 98-117), b. at Italica Spain, 18
September, 53; d. 7 August, 117.
He was descended from an old Roman family, and was adopted in 97
by the Emperor Nerva. Trajan was one of the ablest of the Roman
emperors; he was stately and majestic in appearance, had a
powerful will, and showed admirable consideration and a
chivalrous kindliness. He gained a large amount of territory for
the empire and laid the foundations of civilization all over the
provinces by the founding of municipal communities. He
established order on the borders of the Rhine, built the larger
part of the boundary wall (limes) between Roman and Germanic
territory from the Danube to the Rhine, and with great
determination led two campaigns (101-2 and 105-7) against the
Dacian king, Decebalus, whose country he converted into a new
province of the empire. Two other provinces were conquered,
although neither proved of importance subsequently. The Governor
of Syria conquered Arabia Petraea and Trajan himself entered
Armenia during the Parthian War (114-7).
In his internal administration Trajan was incessantly occupied
in encouraging commerce and industries. The harbour of Ancona
was enlarged and new harbours and roads were constructed.
Numerous stately ruins in and around Rome give proof of this
emperor's zeal in erecting buildings for public purposes. The
chief of these is the immense Forum Trajanum, which in size and
splendour casts the forums of the other emperors into the shade.
In the middle of the great open space was the colossal
equestrian statute of Trajan; the free area itself was
surrounded by rows of columns and niches surmounted by high
arches. At the end of the structure was the Bibliotheca Ulpia,
in the court of which stood the celebrated Trajan's Column with
its reliefs representing scenes in the Dacian wars. Later
Hadrian built a temple to the deified Trajan at the end of the
Forum towards the Campus Martius.
Art and learning flourished during Trajan's reign. Among his
literary contemporaries were Tacitus, Juvenal, and the younger
Pliny with whom the emperor carried on an animated
correspondence. This correspondence belonging to the years 111-3
throws light on the persecution of Christians during this reign.
Pliny was legate of the double Province of Bithynia and Pontus.
In this territory he found many Christians and requested
instructions from Trajan (Ep. 96). In his reply (Ep. 97) Trajan
considers the confession of Christianity as a crime worthy of
death, but forbades a search for Christians and the acceptance
of anonymous denunciations. Whoever shows by sacrificing to the
gods that he is not a Christian is to be released. Where the
adherence to Christianity is proved the punishment of death is
to follow. The action he prescribed rests on the coercive power
of the police, the right of repression of the magistracy, which
required no settled form of procedure. In pursuance of these
orders measures were taken against Christians in other places
also. The most distinguished martyrs under Trajan were Ignatius,
Bishop of Antioch, and Simeon, Bishop of Jerusalem. Legend names
many others, but there was no actual persecution on a large
scale and the position of the Christians was in general
satisfactory.
MERIVALE, Hist. of the Romans under the Empire (London,
1850-62), lxiii, lxiv; SCHILLER, Gesch. der romischen
Kaiserzeit, I (Gotha, 1883), 543-94; DOMASZEWSKI, Gesch. der
romischen Kaiser, II (Leipzig, 1909), 171-86; LA BERGE, Essai
sur le regne de Trajan (Paris, 1877); RAMSAY, The Church in the
Roman Empire (London, 1893); ARNOLD, Studien zur Gesch. de
plinianischen Christenverfolgung (Konigsberg, 1887).
KLEMENS LOFFLER
Trajanopolis
Trajanopolis
Titular metropolitan see of Rhodope. The city owes its
foundation or restoration to Trajan. Le Quien (Oriens Christ.,
I, 1193-96) mentions a great many of its bishops: Theodulus,
persecuted by the Arians in the fourth century; Syncletius, the
friend of St. John Chrysostom; Peter, present at the Council of
Ephesus in 431; Basilius at that of Chalcedon in 451;
Abundantius in 521; Eleusius in 553; Cudumenes about 1270;
Germanus in 1352. In 1564 Gabriel is called Metropolitan of
Trajanopolis, that is of Maronia, which proves that Trajanopolis
was then destroyed and that the title of metropolitan had passed
to the neighbouring city of Maronia. About 640 Trajanopolis had
two suffragan sees (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte. . .Texte der Notitiae
episcopatuum", 542); at the beginning of the tenth century,
seven (Gelzer, op. cit., 558). St. Glyceria, a martyr of the
second century, venerated on 13 May, was born there. The town is
mentioned by Villchardouin (ed. Wailly, 382, 568); it was
captured and pillaged in 1206 by Joannitza, King of the
Bulgarians (George Acropolita, "Hist.", XIII). It is still
mentioned in Nicephoras (Ancedota of Boissonade, V, 279), in
John Cantacuzenus (Hist., I, 38; II, 13; III, 67), in George
Pachymeres (ad ann. 1276, V, 6), etc. The site of Trajanopolis
was discovered by Viquesnel and Dumont on the right bank near
the mouth of the Maritza, not far from Ouroundjik.
VIQUESNEL, Voyage dans le Turquie d'Europe: description phys. et
geolog. de la Thrace, II, 297; DUMONT, Arch. des missions
scientif., III (Paris, 1876), 174; MULLER, Ptolemaei geographia,
I, 487; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s.v.
S. VAILHE
Trajanopolis
Trajanopolis
A titular see of Phrygia Pacatiana, suffragan of Laodicea. The
only geographer who speaks of Trajanopolis is Ptolemy (v, 2, 14,
15), who wrongly places this city in Greater Mysia. It was
founded about 109 by the Grimenothyritae, who obtained
permission from Hadrian to give the place the name of his
predecessor. It had its own coins. Hierocles (Synecedemus, 668,
150) calls it Tranopolis, and this abridged form is found, with
one exception, in the "Notitae episcopatuum", which speak of the
see up to the thirteenth century among the suffragans of
Laodicea. Le Quien (Oriens Christianus, I, 803) names seven
bishops of Trajanopolis: John, present at the Council of
Constantinople under the Patriarch Gennadius, 459; John, at the
Council of Constantinople under Menas, 536; Asignius, at the
Council of Constantinople, 553; Tiberius, at the Council in
Trullo, 692; Philip, at Nice, 787; Eustathius, at
Constantinople, 879. Another, doubtless more ancient than the
preceding, Demetrius, is known from one inscription (C. I. G.,
9265). Trajanopolis has been variously identified; the latest
identification is Radet ("En Phrygie", Paris, 1895), who locates
it at Tcharik Keui, about three miles from Ghiaour Euren towards
the south-east, on the road from Oushak to Sousouz Keui, vilayet
of Brusa, a village abounding in sculptures, marbles, and
fountains, and where the name of the city may be read on the
inscriptions. However, Ramsay (Asia Minor, 149; Cities and
Bishopries of Phrygia, 595) continues to identify Trajanopolis
with Ghiasour Euren.
S. PETRIDES
Tralles
Tralles
A titular see, suffragan of Ephesus in Asia Minor. It was
founded, it is said, by the Argians and Thracians, and is
situated on one of the slopes of Mount Messogis in the valley of
the Meander; it was one of the most populous and richest cities
of Lydia. King Attalus had a splendid palace there. The local
god was Zeus Larasios, but Apollo Pythius and other divinities
were also worshipped.
Tralles was destroyed by an earthquake but was rebuilt by
Augustus and took the name of Caesarea. Christianity was
introduced at a very early date. In his famous letter to the
Church at Tralles, St. Ignatius of Antioch says that their
bishop, Polybius, visited him at Smyrna, and he puts them on
their guard against Docetism (q. v.). We see by this letter that
the Church there was already well organized. Among its bishops
were: Heracleon, in 431; Maximus, in 451; Uranius, in 553;
Myron, in 692; Theophylactus, in 787; Theophanes and Theopistus,
in the ninth century; John, in 1230 (Revue des etudes grecques,
VII, 80). In 640 ("Ecthesis Pseudo-Epiphanii"; Gelzer,
"Ungedruckte. . . .Texte der notitiae episcopatuum", 537).
Tralles appears as suffragan of Sardes in Lydia, and we know,
despite Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 697), that it was such in
553. Towards 1270 Andronicus, son of Michael VIII Palaeologus,
rebuilt and repeopled the city; it then numbered 36,000
inhabitants, but it was not long before it was retaken and
demolished by the Turks (Pachymeres, "De Michaele Palaeologo",
VI, 20 and 21, in P.G., CXLIII, 929-34). The emir Aidin then
gave it the name which it still bears, Aidin Guzel-Hissar; it is
a sanjak of the vilayet of Symrna, numbering 40,000 inhabitants,
of whom 28,000 are Mussulmans, 10,000 Greek Schismatics, and the
remainder Jews or Armenians. There are 120 Catholics. The
Mechitarists of Vienna and the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul
have two schools there. Tralles was the birthplace of Anthemius,
the architect of St. Sophia of Constantinople.
LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, I (1740), 695-8; TEXIER, Asie
Mineure (Paris, 1862), 279-81; RAYET, Milet et le golfe
latimique (Paris, 1877), 33-116; LEBAS-WADDINGTON, Asie Mineure,
597-616, 1651; CHAPOT, La province romaine proconsulaire d'Asie
(Paris, 1904), passim; CUINET, La Turquie d' Asie, III (Paris,
1892), 591-9; PAPPACONSTANTINOU, Tralles (Athens, 1895), in
Greek.
S. VAILHE
Trani and Barletta
Trani and Barletta
(Tranen, et Barolen.)
Diocese in Italy. The city of Trani is situated on the Adriatic
in a fertile plain, producing cereals, wine, and oil, which are
exported in great quantities. For a long time, however, the port
has lost the importance it had in the time of the Norman and
Angevins who fortified it. The fishing industry is extensive.
The cathedral, in Byzantine style, was built by Canon Nicola di
Trani in 1143; its bronze gates by Barisano date from that
period. Outside the city, on a peninsula, stand the old
Benedictine Abbey of S. Maria de Colonna, containing a mineral
spring, the acqua di Cristo". Trani is built on the site of the
ancient Turenum. It grew in importance under the Byzantines and
was taken several times by the dukes of Benevento. In 840 and
1009 it fell into the hands of the Saracens. In the tenth and
eleventh centuries it was a republic recognizing the nominal
sovereignty of Byzantium. The Ordinamenta et consuetudo maris",
published in 1063 by the consuls of Trani is, after the "Tavole
di Amalfi", the oldest maritime commercial code of the Middle
Ages. Trani resisted the Norman invaders energetically, but in
1073 it had to open its gates to Pierre d'Hauteville, who
assumed the title of Count of Trani. In the twelfth century, in
league with Bari, Troia, and Melfi, it attempted to regain its
ancient freedom; and in the battle of Bigano (1137) defeated
Roger of Sicily, but two years later it had to capitulate.
Frederick II constructed a fortress there and made it one of the
royal residences. In the Neapolitan wars Trani became a place of
the greatest importance, especially during the struggle between
the Aragonese and the Angevins. From 1497 to 1509 it was held by
Venice. Charles V established a school of jurisprudence there.
In 1647 the populace rebelled against the nobles; in 1799 the
people opposed the republic, and the city in consequence was
sacked by the revolutionaries and the French. The legend of St.
Magnus relates that there was at Trani about the middle of the
third century a bishop, Redemptus, who was succeeded by St.
Magnus. The first bishop whose date is known with certainty is
Eusebius who was present at the dedication of the Basilica of
Monte Gargano in 493. A few other names have been preserved like
Suthinius (761) and Rodostanus (983). Till then Trani had
certainly followed the Latin Rite and Bishop Bernardo opposed
the decree of the Partiarch Polyeuctus (968) introducing the
Greeek Rite; it is uncertain whether Joannes, who embraced the
schism of Michael Caerularius and in consequence was deposed by
Nicholas II (1059), belonged to the Greek Rite. His sxuccessor
was Delius, and thenceforward Trani continued in the Latin Rite.
In 1098 St. Nicholas Pellegrino, a Byzantine bishop, died there;
under another Byzantine the new cathedral was dedicated to that
saint. Grammaro was imprisoned in Germany by Henary VI for
supporting King William; Bartolommeo Brancacci (1328)
distinguished himself on several embassies and was chancellor of
the Kingdom of Naples. Mention may be made likewise of Cardinal
Latino Orsini (1438), Cosimo Migliorati (1479), Giovanni
Castelar (1493), Giambernardo Scotti, a Theatine (1555), who
introduced the Tridentine reform, Cesare Lambertini, the
canonist (1503); Diego Alvarez, O. P. (1607), the famous
adversary of Molina; Tommaso de Sarria, O. P. (1656), who
enlarged the seminary; Giuseppe Antonio Davanzati (1717), who
abolished many abuses. With the See of Trani is united the
ancient Diocese of Salpe (Salapia of the Greeks), its known
bishops comprising Palladius (465) and 23 successors before the
definitive union in 1547. Anoather united see is that of Carnia,
which had bishops before the time of St. Gregory, who entrusted
it to the care of the Bishop of Reggio; in 649 it had a new
ordinary, but later the city fell into decay. The Archbishop of
Trani has also the title of Bishop of Nazareth, because when
Palestine was lost in 1190 the title of that see was transferred
to Barletta (the ancient Barduli), a seaport on the Adriatic, a
little south of Trani, to which diociese it then belonged. At
Nazareth between 1100 and 1190 there were eight Latin bishops;
the names of the bishops resident at Barletta before 1265 are
unknown. We may mention the following Bishops: Blessed Agostino
Favorini (1431), General of the Augustinians, a learned writer,
and Maffeo Barberini (1604), later Urban VIII. In 1455 the
Diocese of Cannae, a city celebrated as the scene of Hannibal's
victory (216 B.C.), was united with that of Nazareth. It was
destroyed in 1083 by Robert Guiscard, with the exception of the
cathedral and the episcopal residence. At Cannae St. Liberalis
suffered martydom. It had bishops in ths sixth century, for St.
Gregory entrusted the see to the care of the bishop of Siponto;
its bishops are again mentioned after the tenth century. In 1534
Cannae was separated from Nazareth and united to Monteverde, but
in 1552 the united dioceses were incorporated with Nazareth. In
1860 the See of Nazareth (Barletta) was united withTrani, the
archbishop of which had been appointed in 1818 perpetual
administrator of the ancient See of Bisceglie, the scene of the
glorious martydom of Saints Pantelemon and Sergius, whose bodies
repose in the cathedral. Tha names of fifty bishops of Bisceglie
are known. Trani has been an archdiocese since the twelfth
century. The united dioceses contain 19 parishes; 98,000
inhabitants; 110 priests; 1 house of religious (men); 15
convents of nuns; 2 schools for girls.
CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI, 47; VANIA, Cenno storico
della citta di Trani (Barletta, 1870).
U. BENIGNI
Transcendentalism
Transcendentalism
The terms transcendent and transcendental are used in various
senses, all of which, as a rule, have antithetical reference in
some way to experience or the empirical order.
(1) For the Scholastics, the categories are the highest classes
of "things that are and are spoken of". The transcendentals are
notions, such as unity, truth, goodness, being, which are wider
than the categories, and, going beyond them, are said to
transcend them. In a metaphysical sense transcendent is opposed
by the Scholastics and others to immanent; thus, the doctrine of
Divine Transcendence is opposed to the doctrine of Divine
Immanence in the Pantheistic sense., Here, however, there is no
reference to experience. (See IMMANENCE.)
(2) In the loosest sense of the word any philosophy or theology
which lays stress on the intuitive, the mystical, the
ultra-empirical, is aid to be transcendentalism. Thus, it is
common to refer to the New England School of Transcendentalism,
of which mention is made further on.
(3) In a stricter sense transcendentalism refers to a celebrated
distinction made by Kant. Though he is not consistent in the use
of the terms transcendent and transcendental, Kant understands
by transcendent what lies beyond the limits of experience, and
by transcendental he understands the non-empirical or a priori
elements in our knowledge, which do not come from experience but
are nevertheless, legitimately applied to the data or contents
of knowledge furnished by experience. The distinction is
somewhat subtle, Yet, it may be made clear by an example. Within
the limits of experience we learn the uniform sequence of acorn
and oak, heat and expansion, cold and contraction, etc., and we
give the antecedent as the cause of the consequent. If, now, we
go beyond the total of our experience and give God as the cause
of all things, we are using the category "cause in a
transcendent sense, and that use is not legitimate. If, however,
to the data of sequence furnished by experience we apply the a
priori form causation, we are introducing a transcendental
element which elevates our knowledge to the rank of universal
and necessary truth: "Every effect has its cause." Kant, as has
been said, does not always adhere to this distinction. We may,
then, understand transcendent and transcendental to refer to
those elements or factors in our knowledge which do not come
from experience, but are known a priori. Empirical philosophy
is, therefore, a philosophy based on experience alone and
adhering to the realm of experience in obedience to Hume's
maxim, " 'Tis impossible to go beyond experience."
Transcendental philosophy, on the contrary, goes beyond
experience, and considers that philosophical speculation is
concerned chiefly, if not solely, with those things which lie
beyond experience.
(4) Kant himself was convinced that, for the theoretical reason,
the transcendental reality, the thing-in-itself, is unknown and
unknowable. Therefore, he defined the task of philosophy to
consist in the examination of knowledge for the purpose of
determining the a priori elements, in the systematic enumeration
of those elements, for forms, and the determination of the rules
for their legitimate application to the data of experience.
Ultra-empirical reality, he taught, is to be known only by the
practical reason. Thus, his philosophy is critical
transcendentalism. Thus, too he left to his successors the task
of bridging over the chasm between the theoretical and the
practical reason. This task they accomplished in various ways,
eliminating, transforming, or adapting the transcendent reality
outside us. the thing-in-itself, and establishing in this way
different transcendentalisms in place of the critical
transcendentalism of Kant.
(5) Fiche introduced Egoistic Transcendentalism. The subject, he
taught, or the Ego, has a practical as well as a theoretical
side. to develop its practical side along the line of duty,
obligation, and right, it is obliged to posit the non-Ego. In
this way, the thing-in-itself as opposed to the subject, is
eliminated, because it is a creation of the Ego, and, therefore
all transcendental reality is contained in self. I am I, the
original identity of self with itself, is the expression of the
highest metaphysical truth.
(6) Schelling, addressing himself to the same task, developed
Transcendental Absolutism. He brought to the problems of
philosophy a highly spiritual imaginativeness and a scientific
insight into nature which were lacking in Kant, the critic of
knowledge, and Fiche, the exponent of romantic personalize. He
taught that the transcendental reality is neither subject or
object, but an Absolute which is so indeterminate that it may be
said to be neither nature nor spirit. Yet the Absolute is, in a
sense, potentially both the one and the other. For, from it, by
gravity, light and organization, is derived spirit, which
slumbers in nature, but reaches consciousness of self in the
highest natural organization, man. There is here a hint of
development which was brought out explicitly by Hegel.
(7) Hegel introduced Idealistic Transcendentalism. He taught
that reality is not an unknowable thing in itself, nor the
subject merely, nor an absolute of indifference, but an absolute
Idea, Spirit, or Concept (Begriff), whose essence is development
(das Werden), and which becomes in succession object and
subject, nature and spirit, being and essence, the soul, law,
the state, art, science, religion, and philosophy.
In all these various meanings there is preserved a generic
resemblance to the original signification of the term
transcendentalism. The transcendentalists one and all, dwell in
the regions beyond experience, and, if they do not condemn
experience as untrustworthy, at least they value experience only
in so far as it is elevated, sublimated, and transformed by the
application to it of transcendental principles. The fundamental
epistemological error of Kant, that whatever is universal and
necessary cannot come from experience, runs all through the
transcendentalist philosophy, and it is on epistemological
grounds that the transcendentalists are to be met. This was the
stand taken in Catholic circles, and there, with few exceptions,
the doctrines of the transcendentalists met with a hostile
reception. The exceptions were Franz Baader (1765-1841), Johann
Frohschammer (1821-1893), and Anton Guenther (1785-1863), who in
their attempt to "reconcile" Catholic dogma with modern
philosophical opinion, were influenced by the transcendentalists
and overstepped the boundaries of orthodoxy. It may without
unfairness be laid to the charge of the German
transcendentalists that their disregard for experience and
common sense is largely accountable for the discredit into which
metaphysics has fallen in recent years.
New England transcendentalism, sometimes called the Concord
School of Philosophy, looks to William Ellery Channing
(1780-1842) as its founder. Its principal representatives are
Amos Bronson Alcott (1799-1888), Ralph Waldo Emerson
(1803-1882), Theodore Parker (1810-1860), Frederick Henry Hedge
(1805-890), George Ripley (1802-1880), and Margaret Fuller
(1810-1850). It had its inception in the foundation of the
Transcendental Club in 1836. The chief influences discernible in
its literary output are German philosophy, French sociology, and
the reaction against the formalism of Its sociological and
economic theories were tested in the famous Brook Farm (1841),
with which the names just mentioned and those of several other
distinguished Americans were associated.
For the history of German transcendentalism see Ueberweg, Hist.
of Philosophy, tr. Morris (New York, 1892); Falckenberg, Hist.
of Modern Philosophy, tr. Armstrong (New York, 1893); Turner,
Hist. of Philosophy (Boston, 1903); St=F6ckl, Gesch. der Phil.
(Mainz, 1888). For New England transcendentalism see
Frothingham, Transcendentalism in New England (New York, 1876);
Codman, Brook Farm (Boston, 1894).
WILLIAM TURNER
Transept
Transept
A rectangular space inserted between the apse and nave in the
early Christian basilica. It sprang from the need of procuring
sufficient space for the increased number of clergy and for the
proper celebration of the service. The length of the rectangle
either equals the entire breadth of the nave, as in Santa Maria
Maggiore and Santa Croce at Rome, or it exceeds this breadth
more or less, so that the transept extends beyond the walls of
the nave. The transept, though, is not peculiar to the Roman
basilica, as was for a long time believed; it is also to be
found in the churches of Asia Minor, as at Sagalassos. Beside
this first form, in which the apse was directly united with the
transept, there were to be found in Asia Minor and Sicily, even
in the early era, a number of churches of a second form. These
were formerly considered to belong to the medieval period,
because they were not fully developed until the Middle Ages.
This is the cross-shaped or cruciform church, over the origin of
which a violent literary controversy raged for a long time. In
the cruciform design the transept is organically developed from
the structure. It contains three squares which in height and
breadth correspond to that of the main nave. Beyond the central
square, called the bay, and connected with it is a fourth
square, the choir, and beyond, and connected with the choir, is
the apse; in this way the cruciform shape of the church is
produced. The transept generally terminates towards the north
and south in a straight line. Still there are a number of
churches, especially in Germany, that end in a semicircular or
triple conch shape. Strzygowski thinks he has found the model of
this style of structure in the Roman imperial palace; this form
of transept is found in as early a church as that of the Virgin
at Bethlehem erected by Constantine. A favourite method in the
Romanesque style was to construct small apses opening into the
transept to the right and left of the choir. In the churches of
the Cistercians and of the mendicant orders these small apses
were transformed at a later date into numerous chapels, as at
Santa Croce at Florence. the prototype of this design can also
be proved to have existed in the East and the districts under
its influence. The doubling of the transept, however, seems to
have been peculiar to Western architecture; this type of
transept appeared both in the Romanesque and in the Gothic
periods, although the manner of producing it varied greatly.
Many Romanesque churches are constructed at the west end the
same as at the east, that is, the west end also contains a
transept and choir. The earliest known church with this double
transept is the eighth-century church of St-Riquier at Centula
in France. The style was also adopted in the church of St.
Pantaleon at Cologne (981), and almost at the same time by
Mittelzell on the island of Reichenau in Lake Constance, and in
many other churches. The west transept disappeared in Gothic
architecture, excepting that in England some of the great
cathedrals have a second, short transept added to the east
choir, as at Salisbury. Gothic architecture also emphasized the
choir by giving it in the large cathedrals three aisles; in this
way very beautiful vistas are produced. In the effort to gain
large, well-lighted spaces the architecture of the Renaissance
and the Baroque periods enlarged the transept and covered the
bay with a cupola which caused the transept to dominate the
entire structure.
BEDA KLEINSCHMIDT
Transfiguration
Transfiguration
The Transfiguration of Christ is the culminating point of His
public life, as His Baptism is its starting point, and His
Ascension its end. Moreover, this glorious event has been
related in detail by St. Matthew (17:1-6), St. Mark (9:1-8), and
St. Luke (9:28-36), while St. Peter (II Peter 1:16-18) and St.
John (1:14), two of the privileged witnesses, make allusion to
it.
About a week after His sojourn in Caesarea Philippi, Jesus took
with him Peter and James and John and led them to a high
mountain apart, where He was transfigured before their ravished
eyes. St. Matthew and St. Mark express this phenomenon by the
word metemorphothe, which the Vulgate renders transfiguratus
est. The Synoptics explain the true meaning of the word by
adding "his face did shine as the sun: and his garments became
white as snow," according to the Vulgate, or "as light,"
according to the Greek text.
This dazzling brightness which emanated from His whole Body was
produced by an interior shining of His Divinity. False Judaism
had rejected the Messias, and now true Judaism, represented by
Moses and Elias, the Law and the Prophets, recognized and adored
Him, while for the second time God the Father proclaimed Him His
only-begotten and well-loved Son. By this glorious manifestation
the Divine Master, who had just foretold His Passion to the
Apostles (Matthew 16:21), and who spoke with Moses and Elias of
the trials which awaited Him at Jerusalem, strengthened the
faith of his three friends and prepared them for the terrible
struggle of which they were to be witnesses in Gethsemani, by
giving them a foretaste of the glory and heavenly delights to
which we attain by suffering.
LOCATION OF THE TRANSFIGURATION
Already in Apostolic times the mount of the Transfiguration had
become the "holy mount" (II Peter 1:18). It seems to have been
known by the faithful of the country, and tradition identified
it with Mount Thabor. Origen said (A.D. 231-54) "Thabor is the
mountain of Galilee on which Christ was transfigured" (Comm. in
Ps. lxxxviii, 13). In the next century St. Cyril of Jerusalem
(Catech., II, 16) and St. Jerome (Ep. xlvi, ad Marcel.; Ep.
viii, ad Paulin.; Ep. cviii, ad Eust.) likewise declare it
categorically. Later St. Proculus, Patriarch of Constantinople
(d. 447; Orat. viii, in Transfig.), Agathangelus (Hist. of
Armenia, II, xvii), and Arnobius the Younger (d. 460; Comm. in
Ps. lxxxviii, 13) say the same thing. The testimonies increase
from century to century without a single dissentient note, and
in 553 the Fifth Council of Constantinople erected a see at
Mount Thabor (Notitif. Antioch. . . . patriarch.).
Some modern writers claim that the Transfiguration could not
have taken place on Mount Thabor, which, according to Josephus,
was then surmounted by a city. This is incorrect; the Jewish
historian speaks neither of a city nor a village; he simply
fortified, as he repeats three times, "the mount called
Itabyrion" ("Bell. Jud.", II, xx, 6; IV, i, 8; Vita, 37). The
town of Atabyrion of Polybius, the Thabor or Celeseth Thabor,
the "flank of Thabor" of the Bible, is situated at the foot of
Mount Thabor. In any case the presence of houses on a wooded
height would not have made it impossible to find a place apart.
It is again objected that Our Lord was transfigured on Mount
Hermon, since He was at that time in its vicinity. But the
Synoptics are all explicit concerning the lapse of time, six
days, or about eight days including those of departure and
arrival, between the discourse in Caesarea and the
Transfiguration, which would infer a somewhat lengthy journey.
Moreover the summits of Hermon are covered with snow as late as
June, and even the lesser peaks of 4000 or 5000 feet are
likewise snow-covered in February and March, the period of the
Transfiguration. Finally, the ancients judged of the height of
mountains by their appearance, and Thabor especially was
considered a "high mountain", if not by David and Jeremias, at
least by Origen and St. Jerome and the pilgrims who made the
ascent.
BARNABAS MEISTERMANN
Feast of the Transfiguration of Christ
Feast of the Transfiguration of Christ
Observed on August 6 to commemorate the manifestation of the
Divine glory recorded by St. Matthew (Chapter 17).
Origin. The Armenian bishop Gregory Arsharuni (about 690)
ascribes the origin of this feast to St. Gregory the Illuminator
(d. 337?), who, he says, substituted it for a pagan feast of
Aphrodite called Vartavarh (roseflame), retaining the old
appellation of the feast, because Christ opened His glory like a
rose on Mount Thabor. It is not found however in the two ancient
Armenian calendars printed by Conybeare (Armenian Ritual, 527
sq.). It probably originated, in the fourth or fifth century, in
place of some pagan nature-feast, somewhere in the highlands of
Asia.
Propagation. The Armenians at present keep it for three days as
one of the five great feasts of the year (seventh Sunday after
Pentecost); it is preceded by a fast of six days. Also in the
Syriac Church it is a feast of the first class. In the Greek
Church it has a vigil and an octave. The Latin Church was slow
in adopting this feast; it is not mentioned before 850
(Martyrology of Wandelbert, Gavanti, "Thesaurus Liturg.", II,
August); it was adopted in the liturgy about the tenth century
in many dioceses, and was celebrated mostly on 6 August; in Gaul
and England, 27 July; at Meissen, 17 March; at Halberstadt, 3
September, etc. In 1456 Callixtus III extended the feast to the
Universal Church in memory of the victory gained by Hunyady at
Belgrade over the Turks, 6 August, 1456. Callixtus himself
composed the Office. It is the titular feast of the Lateran
Basilica at Rome; as such it was raised to a double second class
for the Universal Church, 1 Nov., 1911.
Customs. On this day the pope at Mass uses new wine or presses a
bunch of ripe grapes into the chalice; raisins are also blessed
at Rome. The Greeks and Russians bless grapes and other fruit.
F.G. HOLWECK
Transvaal
Transvaal
Vicariate apostolic; lies between 23DEG 3' and 27DEG 30' S.
lat., and 25DEG and 32DEG E. long. The total population is
approximately estimated at 960,000, consisting of about 320,000
whites and 640,000 natives. The agricultural and pastoral
resources of this portion of south Africa are great, the vast
rolling plains being capable of raising almost unlimited
quantities of cereals. Stock-raising can also be pursued to
great advantage. The discovery of gold in the Transvaal has
brought about a large influx of British immigrants, who have
developed the mineral resources of the country. Since the time
of the "Great Trek" (1835-38) of the emigrant Dutch farmers from
Cape Colony, several wars have been waged between the Boers,
natives, and British. But streams of Boer immigrants succeeded
in repelling the natives, and in gradually securing their own
independence. In 1850 the British were engaged in a lengthy and
costly war with the Kafirs, during which the Boers took
advantage of the situation to demand the recognition of their
independence; this was granted to them by the Sand River
Convention, 17 Jan., 1852, and Great Britain gave up the Orange
River Sovereignty in 1834, which they had proclaimed in 1848
after the battle of Boomplaats. In 1876 the Boers were defeated
by the Kafirs, and Great Britain, afraid of a general rising of
the natives throughout south Africa, deemed it expedient to
annex the country, which was done, 12 April, 1877. A new war,
however, broke out between British and Boers, in which the
former were defeated, 27 Feb., 1881, and the Boers recovered
their independence, which they enjoyed until the outbreak of the
war in Oct., 1899, which resulted in their defeat and the final
annexation of the country to the British Empire.
The Transvaal formed a portion of the Vicariate of Natal until
1886. From time to time the few Catholics residing in this part
of South Africa were visited by a priest from Natal, till 1877,
when the first mission was founded in Pretoria by the Right
Rev., Dr. Jolivet, O. Mi. I. The first church in the Transvaal
was not, however, completed until the first Sunday of October,
1887, when it was dedicated by Bishop Jolivet. At that time the
number of Catholics at Pretoria was about 100. In the other
localities of the Transvaal the Catholic population was
insignificant. Johannesburg, which has at the present day a
population of about 130,000, including about 80,000 Europeans
and 50,000 natives and Asiatics, was then hardly in existence.
The Catholic population is about 9500, Europeans, natives, and
Syrians included.
The Transvaal was detached from Natal in 1886 by Leo XIII. It
remained an independent prefecture Apostolic till 29 Jan., 1902.
The first prefect Apostolic was the Very Rev. Father Moniginoux,
O. M. I., who was succeeded by Very Rev. Father Schock, O. M.
I., who died on his way to the chapter of his order held in
Paris in 1898. Until Jan., 1902, father Jean de Laey, O. M. I.,
acted as prefect Apostolic. Then the Right Rev. Dr. Matthew
Gaughran, O. M. I., was elected Vicar Apostolic of Kimberley,
and administrator of the Transvaal prefecture. On 20 Nov., 1904,
the prefecture Apostolic of the Transvaal became a vicariate,
and the Right Rev. Dr. William Miller, O. M. I., was consecrated
Bishop of Eumenia, and Vicar Apostolic of the Transvaal. He
resides at Johannesburg. (See KAFIRS.)
On 13 Jan., 1911, the northern portion of the Vicariate of the
Transvaal, including the two districts of Zoutpansberg and
Waterberg, lying between 24DEG and 23DEG S. lat., and between
28DEG and 32DEG E. long. was erected into a prefecture
Apostolic, under the title of Prefecture Apostolic of the
Northern Transvaal, and entrusted to the care of the
Benedictines, with the Very Rev. Father Lanslots, O. S. B., as
prefect Apostolic. The missionaries number at the present 6
fathers and 3 lay brothers, all of whom are natives of Belgium.
Through the erection of the new prefecture Apostolic, the
boundaries of the Vicariate of the Transvaal have been altered.
They are at present delimited by 25DEG and 32DEG E. long., and
27DEG S. lat. (north of the Orange River Colony) and 28DEG S.
lat. (west of the same Colony).
There are at present (1911) in the Vicariate of the Transvaal:
27 priests (13 of whom are Oblates, 12 secular, 2 military
chaplains); and 1 Oblate lay brother and 20 Marist Brothers, who
conduct a very prosperous school at Johannesburg; also other
schools, a sanatorium, a refuge, a hospital, and a home for
children and aged, are under the management of various religious
congregations, viz., the Sisters of the Holy Family; Sisters of
Nazareth House; Dominican Sisters; Sisters of the Good Shepherd;
Sisters of Mercy; Ursuline Sisters; and Sisters of Loreto;
making a total number of 147 Sisters for the whole vicariate.
Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907), 444-45; The Catholic
directory of British South Africa (Cape Town, 1910).
A. LANGOUET
Transylvania
Transylvania
(Also TRANSYLVANIENSIS or ERDELY).
Diocese in Hungary, suffragan of Kalocsa Bacs. The foundation of
the see is attributed to King St. Stephen, but it was probably
established by King St. Ladislaus, patron of Transylvania; Simon
(1103-13) was the first bishop. The episcopal residence is at
Gyula-Fehervar (Alba Julia) in Also-Feher.
The original limits of the diocese varied somehat from the
present boundaries, as they included the County of Marmaros,
while the provostship of Szeben was exempt and some parts of the
Szekler country were subject to the Bishop of Milkovia in
Rumania. The bishops received rich donations from King Bela IV,
Charles Robert, Louis I, and Sigismund. The diocese suffered
greatly during the reign of Bela IV from the Tatar invasion, and
during the civil disturbances under his successors, but
recovered very quickly in the fourteenth century. The see was
again imperilled by the advance of the Turks, but its decay did
not set in until the sixteenth centruy, and was caused by the
progress of Lutheranism, in consequence of which the exempt
provostship of Szeben ceased to exist, and by internal
disturbancea in Transylvania. It flourished again under Cardinal
Martinuzzi, but after his assassination in 1551 it decayed
rapidly. The advance of Protestantism led, in 1556, to the
secularization of the see, which was, however, re-established by
Prince Stephen Bathory. After the coming of the Jesuits the
Catholic Faith flourished again, but only while the house of
Bathory continued to rule. Bishop Demetrius Napragyi was forced
to leave the see, and in 1601 the cathedral of Gyula-Fehervar,
which had been founded in the thirteenth century, was taken and
held by the Protestants until the eighteenth century, the
Catholics not regaining possession of it until the reign of
Charles III.
When the Principality of Transylvania lost its independence, the
decrees against the Catholic Church were withdrawn, but the
bishopric and chapter were not re-established until 1713. The
succession to the see had been kept up regularly till 1713, but
the bishops resided abroad. The exempt provostship of Szeben was
incorporated in the bishopric, which was completely restored
under Maria Theresa in 1771. Of the bishops, who filled the see
after 1713, the following may be mentioned: Ignatius Count
Batthyany (1780-98), who founded the library at Gyula-Fehervar,
whic is named after him; Alexander Rudnay (1816-19), later
Archbishop of Gran; Louis Haynald (1852-64), afterwards
Archbishop of Kalocsa. Count Gustavus Majlath has occupied the
episcopal see since 1897. The diocese contains: 16
archdeaconries; 10 titular abbeys; 2 titular provostships; 229
parishes; 398 secular priests; 226 regular clergy; 30
monasteries of men and 17 convents of nuns; the Catholics number
354,145. There are 103 patrons. The chapter consista of 10
active members and of 6 titular canons. Catholics are to a
certain extent autonomous, i.e., certain church and school
matters are managed by mixed boards, parly clerical, partly lay.
This autonomy dates back to the time of the Reformation; it
ceased in 1767 with the establishment of the Commissio catholica
by Maria Theresa, and was re-established as late as 1873. The
control is exercised by the general assembly of the Catholic
estates and a managing committee.
PRAY, Specimen hierarchiae Hungariae, II (POZSONY, 1776-9),
202-8: SZEREDAL, Series antiq. et recent. episcop. Transylvaniae
(Gyula-Fehervar, 1790); Schematismus diacesis Tr. pro 1909; A
katolikus Magyarorszag (i.e. Catholic Hungary) (Budapest, 1902).
A. ALDASY
Trapani
Trapani
(TREPANENSIS).
Diocese in Sicily, suffragan of Palermo. The city is the capital
of a Sicilian province situated on a tongue of land at the most
western part of the island, shaped like a reaping-hook, hence
the ancient name Drepanon (reaping-hook). It has a good harbour
with exports of wine, acid fruits, fish (especially tunny-fish),
salt, and ornaments of coral, alabaster, and mother-of-pearl,
which are extensively manufactured. The cathedral, exteriorly
resembling a fortress, contains paintings by Careca and Vandyke
(Crucifixion), and statue of the Dead Christ in alabaster by
Tartaglia. Other churches are: San Michele, with wooden
statuary, and the sanctuary of the Annunziata outside the city,
with a colossal statue of the Madonna, attributed to Nicolo
Pisano. In the Jesuit church, called "Nazionale", are precious
pictures by Morrealese, Spagnoletto, and Marabiti. The ancient
college, now a lyceum, contains the Fardelliona Gallery, with
valuable paintings by Reni, Luca Giordano, Caravaggio, Salvator
Rosa, Guercino, etc. Trapani is the birthplace of Carrera and
Errante the painters, Ximenes the mathematician, Scarlatti the
musician, and the Carmelite St. Alberto degli Abbati.
Excavations have proved that the shore about Trapani was
inhabited during the Stone Age. Drepanon must have been founded
by the Greeks, but fell under the sway of the Carthaginians.
Hamilcar fortified the port against the Romans, who in 250
suffered a severe defeat near by, at the hands of Adherbal. In
the vicinity is Mons Eryx (now San Giuliano), with a magnificent
temple of Venus and many votive offerings. Under the Romans the
temple fell into decay, but was restored by Tiberius. Trapani
was sacked by the Moors in 1077. In 1282 Pedro III of Aragon
landed there to begin the capture of the island. In 1314 it was
besieged by Robert, King of Naples. Charles V fortified it. The
city boasts of having received the Gospel from St. Paul; it is
not known to have had any bishop before the Arab conquest of
Sicily; certainly it was subject to the See of Mazzara from the
Norman Conquest till 1844. Its first bishop was the Redemptorist
Vincenzo M. Marolda.
CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI, 556.
U. BENIGNI
Trapezopolis
Trapezopolis
A titular see in Phrygia Pacatiana, suffragan to Laodicea.
Trapezopolis was a town of Caria acording to Ptolemy (V, 2, 18)
and Pliny (V, 109); according to Socrates (Hist. eccl., VII,
xxxvi), Hierocles (Synecdeus, 665, 5), and the "Notitiae
episcopatuum" it was a town of Phrygia Pacatiana and among the
suffragans of Laodicea until the thirteenth century. Nothing is
known of its history. Its coins testify to close intercourse
with Attouda, now Assar, and its site must be sought near this
town, most probably at Kadi Keui, capital of a nahie in the
sandjak of Denizli and the vilayet of Smyrna. Le Quien (Oriens
christ., I, 809) names six bishops of Trapezopolis:
Hierophilius, prior to 400; Asclepiades, present at the Council
of Ephesus (431); John, at Chalcedon (451); Eugenius, at
Constantinople (692); Zacharias, at Nicaea (787); Leo, at
Constantinople (879).
SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Rom. Geogr., s.v.; RAMSAY, Cities and
Bishopries of Phrygia, 171 and passim; MULLER, notes on Ptolemy,
ed. DIDOT, I, 822.
S. PETRIDES
Trappists
Trappists
The common name by which the Cistercians who follow the reform
inaugurated by the Abbot de Rance (b. 1626; d. 1700) in the
Abbey of La Trappe, were known; and often now applied to the
entire Order of Reformed Cistercians. Thus it cannot be said
that there is an Order of Trappists; though if one were to speak
of Trappist monks, he would be understood to refer to monks of
the Order of Reformed Cistercians, as distinguished from the
Order of Cistercians of the common Observance (see Cistercians
and La Trappe). The primitive austerities of the cistercians had
fallen into desuetude in practically the entire order
principally through the introduction of commendatory abbots,
political disturbances, and human inconstancy; and though many
and very praiseworthy attempts at their restoration had been
made in France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Portugal, etc., yet these
were but local or at most national in extent. That of de Rance,
however, was destined by Divine Providence to be more enduring
and of wider scope than any other. Although the Abbey of La
Trappe flourished exceedingly, even after the death of its
venerated reformer, as evidenced by more than 300 professions
between the years 1714 and 1790, yet the spirit of materialism
and sensualism rampant in the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries, did not permit the rapid extension of the reform
outside its walls; it did not even allow the entire severity of
ancient Citeaux to be introduced at La Trappe, though this
reform was the most thorough and perfect of the many attempts
that had then been made. Consequently it founded but a small
number of monasteries; these were: Buon-Solazzo, hear Florence
(1705), and St. Vito at Rome (1709); Casamari, in the Papal
States, was obliged to adopt the Constitutions of de Rance
(1717), but for nearly a century there was no further expansion.
It was from the time of these earliest foundations that they who
embraced de Rances reform were called Trappists. Too much credit
cannot be given to these noble bands of monks, who by their
lives demonstrated to a corrupt world that man could have a
higher ambition than the gratification of the mere natural
instincts of this ephemeral life.
At the time of the Revolution, when the monastery of La Trappe,
in common with all others, was ordered to be confiscated by the
Government, the people of the neighbourhood petitioned that an
exception be made in their favour, and the Trappists themselves,
encouraged by this, addressed a memorial to the National
Assembly and the king considered the matter for nearly a year,
but finally decided that they should be despoiled like the
others. com augustine de Lestrange (b. 1754; d. 1827, see
Lestrange), vicar-general of the Archdiocese of Vienna, had
entered La Trappe (1780) in order to escape the burden of the
episcopate. He it was whom God had raised up to preserve the
Trappists when so direly threatened with extinction; he
resolved, therefore, to expatriate himself for the welfare of
his order. Having been elected superior of those who were of the
same mind, and with the permission of his higher superiors, he
left La Trappe 26 april, 1791, with twenty-four religious, and
established a monastery at Val-Sainte, Canton of Fribourg,
Switzerland. Here they had much to suffer besides the rigour of
their rule, for their monastery (which had formerly belonged to
the Carthusians) was an unroofed ruin; they were in want of the
very necessities of life, not even having the meagre
requirements they were accustomed to.
In France the Revolution was taking its course. On 3 June, 1792,
the commissioners of the Government arrived at La Trappe, took
the sacred vessels and vestments, as well as everything
moveable, and obliged the eighty-nine religious yet remaining to
abandon their abbey and find a home as best they could; some in
other monasteries, and others in charitable families of the
neighbourhood. At Val-Sainte, whilst celebrating the feast of
St. Stephen, the religious resolved to put into practice the
exact and literal observance of the Rule of St. Benedict, and
three days afterwards, 19 July, they began the new reform;
establishing the order of exercises prescribed by the holy
patriarch, as well as all the primitive fasts, together with the
first usages of Citeaux; even making their rule still more
severe in many points. They entered upon their new mode of life
with a fervour that exceeded discretion and had soon to be
moderated. Even in their exile many subjects were attracted to
them, so that they were enabled to send religious to found
several new monasteries: one in Spain (1793), a second in
England at Lulworth the same year, a third at Westmalle, Belgium
(1794), and a fourth at Mont-Brac, in Piedmont (1794). On 31
July, 1794, Pius VI encouraged these religious by a special
Brief, and authorized the erection of Val-Sainte into an abbey
and mother-house of the congregation of Trappists. Dom Augustine
was elected abbot, 27 Nov. of this year, and given supreme
authority over the abbey and congregation. This state of quiet
and prosperity lasted but six years. When the French invaded
Switzerland (1798) they compelled the Trappists to find a refuge
elsewhere; thus they were obliged to roam from country to
country, even Russia and America being visited by the
indomitable abbot and some of his companions, with the hope of
finding a permanent home, until after almost incredible
sufferings the fall of Napoleon permitted them to return to
France. The monasteries of La Trappe and Aiguebelle came into
the possess ion of Dom Augustine, who divided the community of
Val-Sainte between them. Other monasteries were re-established
from time to time, as the number of religious increased and as
they were able to purchase the buildings.
From 1813 N.-D. de l'Eternite, near Darfeld, Westphalia (founded
16 Oct., 1795, from the Abbey of Val-Sainte), which had been
exempted some years previous from the authority of Dom
Augustine, followed the Regulations of de Rance, which differed
from those of Dom Augustine principally in the hour for dinner,
and the length of time devoted to manual labour; their order of
exercises was naturally followed by the houses founded by them,
thus instituting a new observance and the nucleus of a
congregation. In 1834 the Holy See erected all the monasteries
of France into the "Congregation of the Cistercian Monks of
Notre-Dame de la Trappe". The Abbot of La Trappe was by right
the vicar-general of the congregation as soon as his election
was confirmed by the president-general of the Order of Citeaux.
They were to hold a general chapter each year; were to follow
the Rule of St. Benedict and the Constitutions of de Rance,
except for a few points, and retain the liturgical books of the
Cistercian Order. Divergences of opinion on several matters
concerning regular observance induced the abbots of the various
monasteries to believe that this union could not be productive
of that peace so much desired, and so at their solicitation the
Holy See issued a new Decree, deciding that "All the monasteries
of Trappists in France shall form two congregations, of which
the former will be termed 'the Ancient Reform of Our Lady of La
Trappe', and the second the 'New Reform of Our Lady of La
Trappe'. Each shall be a congregation of the Cistercian Monks.
The Ancient Reform is to follow the Constitutions of de Rance,
whilst the New Reform is not to follow the Constitutions of the
Abbot de Lestrange, which it abandoned in 1834, but the Rule of
St. Benedict, with the ancient Constitution of Citeaux, as
approved by the Holy See excepting the prescriptions contained
in this Decree. The Moderator General of the Cistercian Order
shall be at the head of both congregations and will confirm the
election of all abbots. In France each congregation shall have
its vicar-general with full authority for its administration"
(Apostolic Decree, 25 Feb., 1847).
After this the congregations began to flourish. The Ancient
Reform made fourteen foundations, some of them in China and
Natal; the New Reform was even more fruitful, establishing
twenty monasteries as far as the United States, Canada, Syria,
etc. The Belgian congregation of Westmalle also prospered,
forming five new filiations. As the combined strength of the
three congregations thus became greater than the Old Cistercian
Order, the earnest desire soon developed amongst all to
establish a permanent bond of union between them, with one head
and a uniform observance; this was effected in 1892. Dom
Sebastian Wyart (b. 1839; d. 1904), Abbot of Sept-Fons and
Vicar-General of the Ancient Reform, was elected first
abbot-general. After twelve years of zealous labour, the most
worthy monument of which was the purchase of the cradle of the
Order, Citeaux, and making it again the mother-house, he passed
to his reward, and was succeeded as abbot-general by Mgr
Augustin Marre, then Abbot of Igny (a monastery which he had
governed since 1881), titular Bishop of Constance and auxiliary
to Cardinal Langenieux of Reims; he is still ruling the order
(1911), with the greatest zeal and prudence.
The name under which the order was reorganized is "Order of
Reformed Cistercians" and while its members no longer bear the
name of "Trappists", yet they are heirs to the old traditions,
and even the name will continue to be connected with them in the
popular mind. The present Constitutions (approved 13 Aug. 1894)
under which the order is governed and upon which all the usages
and regulations are based, is derived from the Rule of St.
Benedict, the "Charta Charitatis" and ancient usages and
definitions of the general chapters of Citeaux, and the
Apostolic Letters and Constitutions. It is divided into three
parts. The first part regards the government of the order; the
supreme power residing in the general chapter, which is composed
of all the abbots (actually in office), titular priors and
superiors of houses, and meets each year under the presidency of
the abbot-general, who is elected by themselves for life. During
the time the general chapter is not in session the order is
directed, in urgent cases, by the abbot-general with the
assistance of a council composed of five definitors, also
elected by the general chapter, but for a term of five years.
The abbot-general is titular Abbot of Citeaux, and must reside
at Rome. The order is not divided into provinces, nor is there
an officer similar to a provincial. Each monastery is autonomous
and maintains its own novitiate; its abbot or titular prior
appointing all local subordinate superiors, and having full
administration in both spiritual and temporal affairs.
Nevertheless each monastery has the duty of visiting all the
houses it has founded, either once each year, or once every two
years, according to distance, and then rendering a report of its
material and spiritual well-being to the next subsequent
general-chapter. The abbot of such a monastery is called the
father-immediate, and the houses thus subject are termed
"daughter-houses" or filiations. It is especially prescribed
that all houses be dedicated to the Blessed Virgin.
The second part is concerned with monastic observances; which
must be uniform in all the monasteries of the order. The Divine
Office must be sung or recited in choir according to the
directions of the Breviary, Missal, Ritual and Martyrology, no
matter how few may be the number of religious in a particular
house; the canonical Office is always preceded (except at
Compline, when it is followed) by the Office of the Blessed
Virgin; and on all ferial days throughout the year Vespers and
Lauds are followed by the Office of the Dead. Mass and the day
Offices are always sung with the Gregorian Chant; Matins and
Lauds also are sung on Sundays and the more solemn feasts.
Mental prayer, one half-hour in the morning, and fifteen minutes
in the evening, is of obligation, but of counsel much more
frequently. Confession must be made once each week, and daily
Holy Communion is strongly commended. Out of the time of Divine
Office, before which nothing is to be preferred, and when not
engaged in manual labour, the monks devote themselves to prayer,
study, or pious reading, for there is never any time granted for
recreation; these exercises always take place in common, never
in private rooms. The hour for rising is at 2 a.m. on weekdays,
1:30 on Sundays, and 1 on the more solemn feasts; whilst the
hour for retiring is at 7 p.m. in winter, and 8 in summer; in
this latter season there is a siesta given after dinner, so that
the religious have seven hours' sleeping the course of the day;
about seven hours also are devoted to the Divine Office and
Mass, one hour to meals, four hours to study and private prayers
and five hours to manual labour; in winter there are only about
four hours devoted to manual labour, the extra hour thus
deducted being given to study.
The monks are obliged to live by the labour of their hands, so
the task appointed for manual labour is seriously undertaken,
and is of such a nature as to render them self-supporting; such
as cultivation of the land, cattle-raising, etc. Dinner is
partaken of at 11 a.m. in summer, at 11:30 in winter, and at 12
on fast days, with supper or collation in the evening. Food
consists of bread, vegetables, and fruits; milk and cheese may
also be given except in Advent, Lent, and all Fridays out of
Paschal time. flesh-meat, fish, and eggs are forbidden at all
times, except to the sick. All sleep in a common dormitory, the
beds being divided from each other only by a partition and
curtain, the bed to consist of mattress and pillow stuffed with
straw, and sufficient covering. The monks are obliged to sleep
in their regular clothing; which consists of ordinary underwear,
a habit of white, and a scapular of black wool, with a leathern
cincture; the cowl, of the same material as the habit, is worn
over all. Enclosure, according to canon law, is perpetual in all
houses. It is never allowed for the religious to speak amongst
themselves, though the one in charge of a work or employment may
give necessary directions; and all have the right of conversing
with the superiors at any time except during the night hours,
called the "great silence".
Studies
Before ordination to the priesthood (and all choir religious are
destined for that) the monk must pass a satisfactory examination
before the abbot, in the curriculum prescribed by the order and
the Decrees of the Holy See; and afterwards all are obliged to
participate in conferences on theology and Sacred Scriptures at
least once each month. Students preparing for ordination are
granted extra time, during the hours of work, for the
prosecution of their studies.
The third part deals with the reception of subjects. The
greatest care is insisted on to see that the postulants are of
good character, honest birth, and without encumbrances of any
kind; also that they have pursued the course of studies
prescribed by the Holy See; they must have attained at least
their fifteenth year. The novitiate is of two years' duration,
during which time the novice is formed to the religious life,
but he can leave, or the superior may send him away, if he is
unable or unwilling to conform to the spirit of his vocation.
The time of probation completed, the subject is voted for, and
if accepted, makes simple, but perpetual vows; these are
followed by solemn vows at the end of three, or in special
cases, five years. Besides choir religious there are lay
brothers. These must be at least seventeen years of age when
received; they are then postulants for two years, novices for
two more, after which they may be admitted to simple, though
perpetual vows, then after six years more they may make solemn
vows. They do not recite the Divine Office, but have special
prayers appointed to be said at the same hours throughout the
day. They are not obliged to follow special studies, but are
engaged in manual labour for a somewhat longer time than the
choir religious; their habit is nearly the same as that of those
in the choir, but brown in colour. They are religious in the
full sense of the word, and participate in all the graces and
privileges of the order, except that they have neither active
nor passive voice in the management of the affairs of the order.
It may be well to deny a few customs that have been attributed,
by ignorance, to the order. The monks do not salute one another
by the "memento mori", nor do they dig a part of their grave
each day; in meeting each other they salute by an inclination of
the head, and graves are dug only after a brother is ready to be
placed in it. (For statistics see Cistercians.)
Gaillardin, Les trappistes ou l'order de Citeaux au XIXe.
(siecle Paris, 1844); Hist. populaire de N.-D. de la Grande
Trappe (Paris, 1895); La Trappe, by a Trappist of Sept-Fons
(Paris, 1870); VErite, Citeaux, La Trappe et Bellefontaine
(Paris, 1883); The Cistercian Order, its Object; its Rule
(Cambridge, 1895); La Trappe, congregation de moines de l'ordre
benedictino-cistercien (Rome 1864); M.P.P., La Trappe mieux
connue (Paris, 1834); Reglements de la Maison Dieu de No.-D. de
la Trappe mis en nouvel order et augmentes des usages
particuliers de la Val-Sainte (2 vols., Fribourg, 1794); Hist.
abregee de l'order de Citeaux by a monk of Thymadeuse
(St-Brieue, 1897); Us des cisterciens reformes de la
congregation de la Grande Trappe, with the Charta Charitatis and
Decretum Apostolicum quo institutae sunt dua congregationes B.M.
de Trappa in Gallia, 1847 (Toulouse, 1876); Us de l'ordre des
cisterciens reformes precedes de la regle de S. Benoit et des
constitutions, published by the general chapter of 1894
(Westmalle, 1895); Reglement de la Trappe du Rev. Pere Dom
Armand-Jean le Bouthillier de Rance, revu par le chapitre
general de la congregation (Paris, 1878).
EDMOND M. OBRECHT
Sts. Trasilla and Emiliana
Sts. Trasilla and Emiliana
Aunts of St. Gregory the Great, virgins in the sixth century,
given in the Roman Martyrology, the former on 24 December, the
latter on 5 January. St. Gregory (Hom. XXXVIII, 15, on the
Gospel of St. Matthew, and Lib. Dial., IV, 16) relates that his
father, the Senator Gordian, had three sisters who vowed
themselves to God and led a life of virginity, fasting, and
prayer in their own home on the Clivus Scauri in Rome. They were
Trasilla (Tarsilla, Tharsilla, Thrasilla), Emiliana, and
Gordiana. Gordiana, led on at first by the words and example of
her sisters, did not persevere but returned to the vanities of
the world. After many years in the service of God, St. Felix
III, an ancestor, appeared to Trasilla and bade her enter her
abode of glory. On the eve of Christmas she died, seeing Jesus
beckoning. A few days later she appeared to Emiliana, who had
followed well in her footsteps, and invited her to the
celebration of Epiphany in heaven. Tradition says that their
relics and those of their mother, St. Silvia, are in the Oratory
of St. Andrew on the Celian Hill.
FRANCES MERSHMAN
Accusations of Treason
Accusations of Treason
A common misrepresentation concerning the Elizabethan
persecution of English and Irish Catholics from 1570 onwards is
the statement that the victims devoted to imprisonment, torture,
and death suffered not for their religious belief but for
treason against the queen and her government. This view,
officially promulgated by Elizabeth's lord high treasurer,
William Cecil, Lord Burghley, in 1583, was constantly reiterated
by the judges in the courts, by Protestant writers in their
controversial works, and has thence made its way into popular
manuals of history. At the present day it frequently reappears
as one of the stock accusations brought against the Church by
Anglican controversialists of various types.
The simple fact that in very many instances those condemned to
death ostensibly for treason were offered their lives and
liberty if they would attend Anglican worship, shows
conclusively that the martyrs did in fact suffer for religion;
but at this epoch religion and politics were so inextricably
confused that this explanation, though valid in the case of
individual martyrs, does not suffice to meet the general
accusation. As a recent Anglican historian writes: "The vexed
question whether the Romanists died for treason or for their
faith implies an antithesis which had little meaning in that age
of mingled politics and religion" (A.F. Pollard, "Political
History of England", VI, 377). Everything centres round the
excommunication of Elizabeth by St. Pius V, 25 February, 1570.
This act created a situation full of perplexity for English
Catholics. It even underlies the history of the rising of the
northern earls in 1569, for when they rose they had reason to
believe that the excommunication had already taken place.
Harassed as they were, the Catholics would take no steps in
defence of their rights till the pope declared that Elizabeth's
misgovernment had so infringed the spiritual liberty of her
subjects as to absolve them from their allegiance. Once this
declaration was made a number of Catholics acted on it, and
there was a certain section who under the influence of Mendoza
and others were implicated in plots against Elizabeth which were
undoubtedly treasonable from the Government's point of view. But
they might well have urged that in so assailing the royal power
they were doing no more against Elizabeth than Bolingbroke had
done against Richard II, or Richmond against Richard III. Yet
neither Henry IV nor Henry VII are usually branded as
"traitors".
The subsequent cases of Pym and Hampden, not to mention the
successful revolutionaries of 1688, show that success or failure
is often made the real test between treason and rebellion. That
a certain party of English Catholics was in rebellion against
Elizabeth is not disputed, but justified rebellion ceases to be
treason and may be the noblest patriotism. Thus Allen with many
of the exiles of Douai and Louvain, and Persons with many of the
Jesuits, saw in the rule of Elizabeth a greater danger to the
highest interests of England than had previously been threatened
in cases where history had justified the deposition of kings.
And the supreme authority had sanctioned this view. Moreover,
such exercise of papal prerogative was one of the recognized
principles of the Middle Ages throughout which it had served to
protect the rights of the people. This became evident later,
when, after the decline of papal power, the autocratic power of
the European sovereigns was greatly increased and always at the
expense of the people. Nevertheless, it remains true that in the
eyes of Elizabeth and her ministers such opposition was nothing
less than high treason. But a large number of English Catholics
refused to go so far as rebellion. The historian already quoted
admits that the opposition which relied on avowedly treasonable
methods was "limited to extremists" (ibid., 297). Elsewhere he
says of the rank and file of English Catholics: "They tried to
ignore their painful dilemma between two forms of allegiance,
for both of which they had deep respect" (p. 370). As Lingard
writes: "among the English Catholics (the bull) served only to
breed doubts, dissensions, and dismay. Many contended that it
had been issued by an incompetent authority; others that it
could not bind the natives till it should be carried into actual
execution by some foreign power; all agreed that it was in their
regard an imprudent and cruel expedient, which rendered them
liable to the suspicion of disloyalty, and afforded their
enemies a presence to brand them with the name of traitors"
(ibid., 225).
The terrible strain of this dilemma was relieved by the next
pope, Gregory XIII, who on 14 April 1580, issued a declaration
that though Elizabeth and her abettors remained subject to the
excommunication, it was not to bind Catholics to their
detriment. The large majority of English Catholics were relieved
in conscience by this dispensation, and never gave the
Government the least ground for suspecting their loyalty, but
they persisted in the practice of their religion, which was made
possible only by the coming of the seminary priests. With regard
to these priests, who entered England at the risk of their lives
to preserve the Catholic religion and to give facilities for
Mass and the sacraments there could be no presumption of treason
by the ancient laws of England. But in the panic which followed
the Northern Rising, Parliament had passed a statute (13 Eliz.
c. 2) declaring it to be high treason to put into effcet any
papal Bull of absolution to absolve or reconcile any person to
the Catholic Church, to be absolved or reconciled, or to procure
or publish any papal Bull or writing whatsoever. Thus for the
first time purely religious acts were declared by Parliament to
be treasonable, a position which no Catholic could admit. It is
clear that persons suffering under such a law as this suffered
for religion and not for treason. Elizabeth's Government,
however, for its own purposes refused to make any distinction
between Catholics who had been engaged in open opposition to the
queen and those who were forced by conscience to ignore the
provisions of this statute of 1571. These two classes, really
distinct, were purposely identified by the Government and
treated as one for controversial purposes. For when the reports
of so many bloody executions for religion began to horrify
Europe, the queen's ministers adopted the defence that their
severity was not exercised against Catholics as such, but as
traitors guilty of treason against their sovereign.
This view was put forward officially in a pamphlet by Lord
Burghley, which was not only published in English but translated
into Latin and other languages for foreign circulation. The very
title of this work indicates its scope: "The Execution of
Justice in England for maintenance of public and Christian
peace, against certain stirrers of sedition and adherents to the
traitors and enemies of the realm without any persecution of
them for questions of religion, as is falsely reported, and
published by the fautors and fosterers of their treasons." This
pamphlet, which was issued on 17 December, 1583, may briefly be
summarized. Attention is first drawn to late rebellions in
England and Ireland which had been suppressed by the queen's
power. Whereupon some of the defeated rebels had fled into
foreign countries and there alleged that they were suffering for
religion. Great stress is laid upon the Bull of excommunication;
and all Catholics living abroad are represented as engaged in
seditious practices with a view to carrying the Bull into
effect. The seminaries are exhibited merely as foundations
established to assist in this disloyal object. They have been
"erected to nurse seditious fugitives". The priests who came
forth at the risk of their lives are not given credit for any
religious purpose, but "the seminary fugitives come secretly
into the realm to induce the people to obey the Pope's bull".
This view is important as it shows the pretext put forth by the
Government to defend the Act of 1585 by which it became high
treason for any seminary priest simply to come to England. The
pamphlet proceeds to decIare that some of these "sowers of
sedition" have been taken, convicted, and executed "not being
ddealt withal upon questions of religion, but justly condemned
as traitors". They were so condemned "by the ancient realm made
200 years past". Moreover, if they retracted their treasonable
opinions their lives were spared. As "the foreign traitors
continue sending of persons to move sedition in the realm" who
cloak their real object of enforcing the Bulls under the pretext
of religion and who "labour to bring the realm into a war
external and domestical", it becomes the duty of the queen and
her ministers to repel such rebellious practices. Burghley
insists that before the excommunication no one had been charged
with capital crimes on the ground of religion, and brings
everything back to the question of the Bull. "And if then it be
inquired for what cause these others have of late suffered death
it is truely to be answered as afore is often remembered that
none at all are impeached for treason to the danger of their
life but such as do obstinately maintain the contents of the
Pope's Bull aforementioned, which do import that her Majesty is
not the lawful Queen of England, the first and highest point of
treason, and that all her subjects are discharged of their oaths
and obedience, another high point of treason. and all warranted
to disobey her and her laws, a third and very large point of
treason."
A fourth point is taken from the refusal of the Catholics to
disavow the pope's proceedings in Ireland. After many other
points some of an historical nature addressed to foreign princes
the writer anticipates the objection that many sufferers had
been simple priests and unarmed scholars. He says "Many are
traitors though they have no armour nor weapon." Such people are
like spies, "necessary accessaries and adherents proper to
further and continue all rebellions and wars. . . . The very
causes final of these rebellions and wars have been to depose
her Majesty from her crown: the causes instrumental are these
kind of seminaries and seedmen of sedition. The pamphlet ends by
proposing six questions or tests by which traitors might be
distinguished from simple scholars. These interrogatories, known
later as "the bloody questions", were ingeniously framed to
entangle the victim into admissions with regard to the pope's
action in excommunicating Elizabeth, which might be construed as
treason. This is the government case and it was promptly
answered by Allen in his "Answer to the Libel of English
Justice", published in 1584, in which he joins issue on all
points, showing "that many priests and other Catholics in
England have been persecuted, condemned and executed for mere
matter of religion and for transgression only of new statutes
which make cases of conscience to be treason without all
pretence or surmise of any old treasons or statutes for the
same". He defends Campion and the other martyrs from the
imputation of treason, points to the oppression of the
Government and the prudent attitude of the Catholics with regard
to the Bull; he explains the doctrine of the excommunication and
deprivation of princes, the advantages of having a supreme
authority to decide between princes and people in causes
involving questions of deprivation; defends the pope's action in
Ireland and concIudes by showing "that the separation of the
prince and realm from the unity of the Church and See Apostolic
and fall from Catholic religion is the only cause of all the
present fears and dangers that the State seemeth to stand in.
And that they unjustly attribute the same to the Pope's Holiness
or Catholics and untruly call them the enemies of the Realm".
In the following year, 1585, the Government took another step
forward in their policy of drawing religious and indifferent
acts into the political net. This was the statute 27 Eliz. c. 2,
by which it was made high treason for any Jesuit or any seminary
priest even to be in England, and felony for anyone to harbour
or relieve them. Even so biased an historian as David Hume
realized the injustice of this measure of which he says: "In the
subsequent part of the queen's reign the law was sometimes
executed by the capital punishment of priests; and though the
partisans of that princess asserted that they were punished for
their treason, not their religion, the apology must only be
understood in this sense, that the law was enacted on account of
the treasonable views and attempts of the sect, not that every
individual who suffered the penalty of the law was convicted of
treason" (Hist. of Eng., sub an 1584). The martyrs themselves
constantly protested against this accusation of treason, and
prayed for the queen on the scaffold. In very many instances
they were offered a free pardon if they would attend the
Protestant church, and some priests unfortunately yielded to the
temptation. But the fact of the offer being made sufficiently
shows that religion, not treason, was the ground of their
offence. This is notably the ease with regard to Blessed Thomas
Percy who had himself been the leader of the Northern Rising and
who yet was offered his liberty at the price of conformity.
There are three beatified martyrs directly connected with the
excommunication, Felton, Storey, and Woodhouse, who for that
reason stand in a class apart from the other martyrs; their
cases have received special treatment by Father Pollen, S.J.
(Camm's "Lives of the English Martyrs", II, xvii-xxii). It may
not be amiss to state that so careful is the Holy See in such
questions that the cause of beatification of James Laborne has
been postponed for more careful consideration simply because of
certain words he uttered about the queen. With regard to all the
other martyrs there is no difficulty in showing that they died
for their religion, and that the accusation of treason in their
regard is false and unfounded.
EDWIN BURTON
Diocese of Trebizond
Trebizond
(TRAPEZUNTINA).
An Armenian Catholic diocese. The city owes its ancient name to
the fact that it was built on the shores of the Black Sea in the
form of a trapeze. It was a Greek colony from Sinopus,
established in the eighth century, B.C., and not a colony from
Trapezus, in Arcadia, as Xenophon relates, who was received here
with enthusiasm during the retreat of the Ten Thousand. After
having formed a part of the Kingdom of Armenia, and then of that
of Pontus, it fell into the hands of the Romans, and was
declared a free city by Pompey. The Emperor Hadrian adorned it
and endowed it with great commercial importance by creating its
artificial harbor. Under Valerian the Goths took and pillaged
it; its inhabitants were slain or sent as slaves to the
Cimmerian Bosphorus. Justinian raised it from its ruins and
thenceforth it became rich in monuments, especially churches and
monasteries. In 1204 when Constantinople fell into the power of
the Latins, a prince of the family of the Comneni, who in 1185
sought safety in Iberia, proclaimed himself Emperor of Trebizond
under the name of Alexis, and founded a Greek empire, the rival
of that of Nicaea. The new state comprised nearly all of the
ancient Pontus Polemoniacus and stretched eastward as far as the
River Phasis. It was in perpetual conflict with the Seljuk Turks
and later with the Osmanli Turks, as well as with the Greeks of
Nicaea and Constantinople, the Italian republics, and especially
the Genoese. During the two centuries and a half in which it
succeeded in subsisting the Empire of Trebizond contributed
greatly to the development of Christian civilization and Greek
literature in those distant parts, until then somewhat backward.
In 1462 Trebizond was taken by assault by the troops of Mohammed
II, and its last emperor, David, was exiled to the vicinity of
Serrae in Macedonia. He was soon obliged to choose between
embracing Islam or forfeiting his life; he kept the faith and
was executed together with six of his children. The seventh fled
to the Peloponnesus where he founded the Comneni of Morea. From
1204 to 1462 Trebizond had, in all, twenty emperors.
At present Trebizond is the capital of the vilayet of the same
name, bounded by those of Sivas and Erzeroum, the Black Sea, and
Asiatic Russia, which after the war of 1877 absorbed a part of
its territory. The vilayet measures about 270 miles from west to
east by 65 miles at its extreme length; its area is 11,275 sq.
miles. Its total population may be estimated at 900,000. The
city itself has 50,000 inhabitants, among whom are 12,000
Greeks, 10,000 Armenians, some Jews, and a few hundred Catholics
The remainder are Turkish Mussulmans, Lazis, Circassians, and
Afghazis. Trebizond has a citadel, at least 40 mosques, 10 Greek
churches, some of which have preserved ancient paintings,
several Armenian churches, etc.; it carries on an active trade
with Persia, Russia, and European countries by way of the black
Sea. Close to the city are several Greek monasteries still
inhabited, and which played a certain part in Byzantine history.
The first traces of Christianity at Trebizond are found under
Diocletian when St. Eugenius, still the patron of the city, St.
Canoeists, and their companions were martyred. Among the saints
of whom mention is still made were the Bishop St. Basil, tenth
century (feast, 20 October), and St. Theodore Gabras, martyred
about 1098 (feast, 2 October). At first merely a suffragan of
Neocaesarea in Pontus Polemoniacus Trebizond became the
metropolitan see of Lazica when the ancient metropolis, Phasis,
was lost by the Byzantine Empire. At the end of the ninth
century it had seven suffragans, which number continued to
increase. The emperors of Trebizond profited by their political
situation to secure privileges for the bishop of their capital.
By an official act of 1 January, 1260, the Greek Patriarch of
Nicaea, at the request of Michael VIII Paleologus, recognized a
semi-independence of the Metropolitan of Trebizond. Thenceforth
the titulars of this city went neither to Nicaea nor
Constantinople to receive episcopal consecration from the
patriarch; it was given them in their own church in the presence
of a delegate from the patriarch who assisted at, or, if he were
a bishop, presided at the ceremony. But the patriarch reserved
to himself as formerly the ordinations of the other
metropolitans or the autocephalous archbishops of the empire. Of
course after the suppression of the Empire of Trebizond in 1462
the metropolitans of this city lost these privileges and were
made like all the other metropolitans, in which condition they
are at present. Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 509-14) gives a
list of eighteen Greek bishops of Trebizond, to which other
names might be added. Among them Domnus, the oldest known, who
assisted at the Council of Nicaea in 325; Atarbius, at Chalcedon
in 451; Anthimus, the future Monophysite Patriarch of
Constantinople, who deposed Pope St. Agapitus in 536; Dorotheus,
who assisted at the Council of Florence (1439), and signed its
decree of union; Cyril, who in 1653 was in Paris with the
Dominican Pere Goar, and made a profession of Catholic faith at
Rome. To these may be added the Bishop Ouranios who, according
to an inscription (C.I.G., 8636), restored buildings in the year
542. In the Middle Ages, because of the Venetian and Genoese
merchants and also because of the missionaries who went to
evangelize the Khazars, Comans, and Tatars, a Latin see was
established at Trebizond. The oldest-known titular was a
Franciscan, Andronicus Comnenus, mentioned in 1289. In Le Quien
(op. cit.. III, 1097-1100) and in Eubel (Hierarchia catholica
medii aevi, I, 520) will be found the names of several other
bishops from 1344 to 1437. The Latin diocese must have lasted
until the capture of the city by Mohammed II.
The Armenian Catholic diocese erected in 1850 by Pius IX, is of
vast extent; it has 4300 faithful, 4 churches, 7 stations, 4
primary schools, 9 secular priests, and 4 Mechitarists. There
are also Jesuits at Marsivan and Amasia, engaged exclusively
with the Armenians; the Oblates of the Assumption are at Amasia
for the same object. The Capuchins are established for the
Latins at Trebizond, Samsun, and Ineboli, and are dependent on
the delegate Apostolic at Constantinople; the Sisters of St.
Joseph of the Apparition have a boarding-school at Trebizond.
GAINSFORD, The Historic of Trebizonde (London, 1616);
FALLMERAYER Gesch. des Kaisertums Trapezunt (Munich, 1827);
FISCHER, Trapezunt u. seine Bedeutung in der Gesch. in
Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Gesch., III (Stuttgart, 1886), 13-39:
IDEM Trapezuns im 11 u. 1 Jahrhundert in Mitteilungen des
Instituts fur ost. Geschichtsforsch. X, 77-127; KRUMBACHER
Gesch. der byzantinischen Literatur (Munich, 1897), 1049-1051;
MILLET, Les monasteres et les eglises de Trebizonde in Bulletin
de correspondance hellenique XIX, 419-459; IDEM, Inscriptions
byzantines de Trebizonde, op cit. XX, 498-501; STRZYGOWSKI Les
chapiteaux de Sainte-Sophie d Trebizonde, op. cit., XIX,
517-522; PETIT, Acte synodal du patriarche Nicephore II sur les
privileges du metropolitain de Trebizonde in Bulletin de
l'institut arch. russe de Constantinople VIII, 163-171;
Missiones catholica (Rome, 1897), 759.
S. VAILHE
Trebnitz
Trebnitz
A former abbey of Cistercian nuns, situated north of Breslau in
Silesia. It was founded in 1203 by Duke Henry the Bearded of
Silesia and his wife St. Hedwig. The story of its foundation
relates that one Duke Henry when out hunting fell into a swamp
from which he could not extricate himself. In return for the
rescue from this perilous position he vowed to build the abbey.
With St. Hedwig's consent, Bishop Ekbert of Bamberg, her
brother, chose the first nuns that occupied the convent. The
first abbess was Petrussa; she was followed by Gertrude, the
daughter of St. Hedwig. Up to 1515 the abbesses were first
princesses of the Piast House and afterwards members of the
nobility. The abbey was richly endowed with lands by Duke Henry.
When Hedwig became a widow she went to live at Trebnitz and was
buried there. It is said that towards the end of the thirteenth
century the nuns numbered 120. In 1672 there were 32 nuns and 6
lay sisters, in 1805 there were 23 nuns and 6 lay sisters. The
abbey suffered from all kinds of misfortunes both in the Middle
Ages and in modern times: from famine in 1315, 1338, 1434, and
1617, from disastrous fires in 1413, 1432, 1464, 1486, 1505,
1595, and 1782. At the Reformation most of the nuns were Poles,
as were the majority until during the eighteenth century. The
Abbey of Trebnitz suffered so greatly during the Thirty Years
War that the nuns fled to Poland, as they did again in 1663 when
the Turks threatened Silesia. The last abbess, Dominica von
Giller, died on 17 August, 1810, and on 11 November, 1810, the
abbey was suppressed and secularized. The building, which was
very extensive, was sold later and turned into a cloth factory.
It is now used as the mother-house of the Trebnitz Sisters of
St. Charles Borromeo and as a hospital conducted by the sisters.
The church, a basilica with pillars in the late Romanesque
style, to which Baroque additions were made, is now the parish
church. The grave of St. Hedwig is in the chapel of St. Hedwig
to the right of the high altar. The grave of Duke Henry I, her
husband, is in front of the altar.
SCHMIDT, Gesch. des Klosterstiftes Trebnitz (Oppein, 1853);
Bach., Gesch. und Beschreibung des Klosterstiftes in Trebnitz
(Neisse, 1859); JUNGNITZ, Wahrfahrtsbuchlein fur Verehrer der
hl. Hedwig (3d ed., Breslau, 1902).
KLEMENS LOeFFLER
Lettice Mary Tredway
Lettice Mary Tredway
(Called "Lady" Tredway)
Born 1595; died Oct., 1677; daughter of Sir Walter Tredway, of
Buckley Park, Northamptonshire; her mother was Elizabeth Weyman.
In July, 1616, Lady Tredway entered the novitiate of the
Canonesses Regular of the Lateran of Notre-Dame-de-Beaulieu at
Sin, near Douai (where she was probably educated), and in Oct.,
1617, made her solemn profession. In 1631 she and Miles Pinkney,
better known as Father Carre, a priest of the English College at
Douai, conceived the project of opening a house for canonesses
for English subjects only at Douai. The idea was approved by the
authorities at home and abroad, and in 1634 it was decided to
open this English convent at Paris. Dr. Smith, Bishop of
Chalcedon, then in exile in Paris, helped them so generously
that he may be counted a co-founder. He blessed Lady Tredway as
abbess, and the Convent of Notre-Dame-de-Sion was permanently
established in the Rue des Fosses in 1639. Father Carre and Lady
Tredway were also practically the founders of the Seminary of
St. Gregory for training priests for the English Mission. A
pension for English ladies and a school were attached to the new
convent, of which Lady Tredway held the office of abbess till
1675, when her infirmities compelled her to resign. Since her
death the superiors have held the title of prioress. For
forty-one years this noble woman laboured bravely for her
convent. The community has been obliged to leave France, and is
established in England at Ealing (1912).
CEDOZ, Un couvent de religieuses anglaises (1891); ALMOND, Les
dames anglaises (Paris, 1911).
FRANCESCA M. STEELE
Francis Tregian
Francis Tregian
Confessor, b. in Cornwall, 1548; d. at Lisbon, 25 Sept., 1608.
He was son of Thomas Tregian of Wolveden, Cornwall, and
Catherine Arundell; and inherited property worth three thousand
pounds a year, the whole of which was confiscated by Elizabeth
becaused he had harboured Blessed Cuthbert Mayne (q.v.).
Previously he had resided at Court in order to help the
persecuted Catholics, and he is said by his biographer to have
incurred the queen's displeasure by refusing her improper
advances. After suffering imprisonment at Windsor and in various
London prisons for twenty-eight years, he was liberated by James
I, who banished him. Having visited Douai he retired to Madrid,
where the King of Spain assigned him a pension. Seventeen years
after death his body was found incorrupt, and miracles are
stated to have been wrought by his intercession. He married
Mary, daughter of Charles, seventh Lord Stourton, by whom he had
eighteen children.
PLUNKETT, Heroum speculum de vita D.D. Francisci Tregeon
(Lisbon, 1655); ANONYMOUS, Great and Long Sufferings for the
Catholic Faith of Mr. Francis Tregian, contemporary MS. printed
by MORRIS in Troubles of Our Catholic Forefathers, I (London,
1872); CHALLONER, Memoirs of Missionary Priests, I (London,
1741); CAMM, Lives of the English Martyrs, II (London, 1905);
Third Douay Diary in Catholic Record Society Publications, X
(London, 1911); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v.; COOPER in
Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.
EDWIN BURTON
Tremithus
Tremithus
Titular see, suffragan of Salamis in Cyprus. The city is
mentioned by Ptolemy (Geog., V, xiii, 6), Hierocles (ed.
Buckhardt, 708, 7), George of Cyprus (ed. Gelzer, 1109), and
other geographers. Among its bishops were: St. Spyridon, a
shepherd and married, present at the council of Nicaea in 325,
and whose cult is popular in the East (Anal. bolland., XXVI,
239); St. Arcadius and St. Nestor, venerated 14 Feb. or 7 March;
Theopompus, at the Second Ecumenical Council in in 381;
Theodore, at the Sixth Ecumenical Council in 681, and who wrote
a biography of St. John Chrysostom (P.G., XLVII; 51-88); George,
at the Second Council of Nicaea in 787; Spyridon in 1081, when
the see was temporarily restored. The usurper Isaac Comnenus was
defeated here in 1191 by Richard Coeur de Lion who afterwards
took possession of Cyprus. The city was then destroyed and
survives only in the Greek village of Trimethusia in the
district of Chrysocho.
LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., II, 1069-72; GELZER, Georgii Cyprii
Descriptio orbis romani (Leipzig, 1890), 213; HACKETT, A History
of the orthodox Church of Cyprus (London, 1901), 322 sqq.
S. VAILHE
Council of Trent
Council of Trent
The nineteenth ecumenical council opened at Trent on 13
December, 1545, and closed there on 4 December, 1563. Its main
object was the definitive determination of the doctrines of the
Church in answer to the heresies of the Protestants; a further
object was the execution of a thorough reform of the inner life
of the Church by removing the numerous abuses that had developed
in it.
I. CONVOCATION AND OPENING
On 28 November, 1518, Luther had appealed from the pope to a
general council because he was convinced that he would be
condemned at Rome for his heretical doctrines. The Diet held at
Nuremberg in 1523 demanded a "free Christian council" on German
soil, and at the Diet held in the same city in 1524 a demand was
made for a German national council to regulate temporarily the
questions in dispute, and for a general council to settle
definitely the accusations against Rome, and the religious
disputes. Owing to the feeling prevalent in Germany the demand
was very dangerous. Rome positively rejected the German national
council, but did not absolutely object to holding a general
council. Emperor Charles V forbade the national council, but
notified Clement VII through his ambassadors that he considered
the calling of a general council expedient and proposed the city
of Trent as the place of assembly. In the years directly
succeeding this, the unfortunate dispute between emperor and
pope prevented any further negotiations concerning a council.
Nothing was done until 1529 when the papal ambassador, Pico
della Mirandola, declared at the Diet of Speyer that the pope
was ready to aid the Germans in the struggle against the Turks,
to urge the restoration of peace among Christian rulers, and to
convoke a general council to meet the following summer. Charles
and Clement VII met at Bologna in 1530, and the pope agreed to
call a council, if necessary. The cardinal legate, Lorenzo
Campeggio, opposed a council, convinced that the Protestants
were not honest in demanding it. Still the Catholic princes of
Germany, especially the dukes of Bavaria, favoured a council as
the best means of overcoming the evils from which the Church was
suffering; Charles never wavered in his determination to have
the council held as soon as there was a period of general peace
in Christendom.
The matter was also discussed at the Diet of Augsburg in 1530,
when Campegio again opposed a council, while the emperor
declared himself in favour of one provided the Protestants were
willing to restore earlier conditions until the decision of the
council. Charles's proposition met the approval of the Catholic
princes, who, however, wished the assembly to meet in Germany.
The emperor's letters to his ambassadors at Rome on the subject
led to the discussion of the matter twice in the congregation of
cardinals appointed especially for German affairs. Although
opinions differed, the pope wrote to the emperor that Charles
could promise the convoking of a council with his consent,
provided the Protestants returned to the obedience of the
Church. He proposed an Italian city, preferably Rome, as the
place of assembly. The emperor, however, distrusted the pope,
believing that Clement did not really desire a council.
Meantime, the Protestant princes did not agree to abandon their
doctrines. Clement constantly raised difficulties in regard to a
council, although Charles, in accord with most of the cardinals,
especially Farnese, del Monte, and Canisio, repeatedly urged
upon him the calling of one as the sole means of composing the
religious disputes. Meanwhile the Protestant princes refused to
withdraw from the position they had taken up. Francis I, of
France, sought to frustrate the convoking of the council by
making impossible conditions. It was mainly his fault that the
council was not held during the reign of Clement VII, for on 28
Nov., 1531, it had been unanimously agreed in a consistory that
a council should be called. At Bologna in 1532, the emperor and
the pope discussed the question of a council again and decided
that it should meet as soon as the approval of all Christian
princes had been obtained for the plan. Suitable Briefs
addressed to the rulers were drawn up and legates were
commissioned to go to Germany, France, and England. The answer
of the French king was unsatisfactory. Both he and Henry VIII of
England avoided a definitive reply, and the German Protestants
rejected the conditions proposed by the pope.
The next pope, Paul III (1534-49), as Cardinal Alessandro
Farnese, had always strongly favoured the convening of a
council, and had, during the conclave, urged the calling of one.
When, after his election, he first met the Cardinals, 17
October, 1534, he spoke of the necessity of a general council,
and repeated this opinion at the first consistory (13 November).
He summoned distinguished prelates to Rome to discuss the matter
with them. Representatives of Charles V and Ferdinand I also
laboured to hasten the council. The majority of the cardinals,
however, opposed the immediate calling of a council, and it was
resolved to notify the princes of the papal decision to hold a
church assembly. Nuncios were sent for this purpose to France,
Spain, and the German king, Ferdinand. Vergerio, nuncio to
Ferdinand, was also to apprise the German electors and the most
distinguished of the remaining ruling princes personally of the
impending proclamation of the council. He executed his
commission with zeal, although he frequently met with reserve
and distrust. The selection of the place of meeting was a source
of much difficulty, as Rome insisted that the council should
meet in an Italian city. The Protestant rulers, meeting at
Smalkald in December, 1535, rejected the proposed council. In
this they were supported by Kings Henry VIII and Francis I. At
the same time the latter sent assurances to Rome that he
considered the council as very serviceable for the extermination
of heresy, carrying on, as regards the holding of a council, the
double intrigue he always pursued in reference to German
Protestantism. The visit of Charles V to Rome in 1536 led to a
complete agreement between him and the pope concerning the
council. On 2 June, Paul III published the Bull calling all
patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, and abbots to assemble at
Mantua on 23 May, 1537, for a general council. Cardinal legates
were sent with an invitation to the council to the emperor, the
King of the Romans, the King of France, while a number of other
nuncios carried the invitation to the other Christian countries.
The Netherlander Peter van der Vorst was sent to Germany to
persuade the German ruling princes to take part. The Protestant
rulers received the ambassador most ungraciously; at Smalkald
they refused the invitation curtly, although in 1530 they had
demanded a council. Francis I took advantage of the war that had
broken out between himself and Charles in 1536 to declare the
journey of the French bishops to the council impossible.
Meanwhile preparations were carried on with zeal at Rome. The
commission of reform, appointed in July, 1536, drew up a report
as the basis for the correction of the abuses in ecclesiastical
life; the pope began preparations for the journey to Mantua. The
Duke of Mantua now raised objections against the holding of the
assembly in his city and made conditions which it was not
possible to accept at Rome. The opening of the council,
therefore, was put off to 1 November; later it was decided to
open it at Vicenza on 1 May, 1538. The course of affairs,
however, was continually obstructed by Francis I. Nevertheless
the legates who were to preside at the council went to Vicenza.
Only six bishops were present. The French king and the pope met
at Nice, and it was decided to prorogue until Easter, 1539. Soon
after this the emperor also desired to postpone the council, as
he hoped to restore religious unity in Germany by conferences
with the Protestants. After further unsuccessful negotiations
both with Charles V and Francis I the council was indefinitely
prorogued at the consistory of 21 May, 1539, to reassemble at
the pope's discretion. When Paul III and Charles V met at Lucca
in September, 1541, the former again raised the question of the
council. The emperor now consented that it should meet at
Vicenza, but Venice would not agree, whereupon the emperor
proposed Trent, and later Cardinal Contarini suggested Mantua,
but nothing was decided. The emperor and Francis I were invited
later to send the cardinals of their countries to Rome, so that
the question of the council could be discussed by the college of
cardinals. Morone worked in Germany as legate for the council,
and the pope agreed to hold it at Trent. After further
consultations at Rome, Paul III convoked on 22 May, 1542, an
ecumenical council to meet at Trent on 1 Nov. of the same year.
The Protestants made violent attacks on the council, and Francis
I opposed it energetically, not even permitting the Bull of
convocation to be published in his kingdom.
The German Catholic princes and King Sigismund of Poland
consented to the convocation. Charles V, enraged at the neutral
position of the pope in the war that was threatening between
himself and Francis I, as well as with the wording of the Bull,
wrote a reproachful letter to Paul III. Nevertheless,
preparations were made for the council at Trent, by special
papal commissioners, and three cardinals were appointed later as
conciliary legates. The conduct, however, of Francis I and of
the emperor again prevented the opening of the council. A few
Italian and German bishops appeared at Trent. The pope went to
Bologna in March 1543, and to a conference with Charles V at
Busseto in June, yet matters were not advanced. The strained
relations which appeared anew between pope and emperor, and the
war between Charles V and Francis I, led to another prorogation
(6 July, 1543). After the Peace of Crespy (17 Sept., 1544) a
reconciliation was effected between Paul III and Charles V.
Francis I had abandoned his opposition and declared himself in
favour of Trent as the place of meeting, as did the emperor. On
19 Nov., 1544, the Bull "Laetare Hierusalem" was issued, by
which the council was again convoked to meet at Trent on 15
March, 1545. Cardinals Giovanni del Monte, Marcello Cervini, and
Reginald Pole were appointed in February, 1545, as the papal
legates to preside at the council. As in March only a few
bishops had come to Trent, the date of opening had to be
deferred again. The emperor, however, desired a speedy opening,
consequently 13 December, 1545, was appointed as the date of the
first formal session. This was held in the choir of the
cathedral of Trent after the first president of the council,
Cardinal del Monte, had celebrated the Mass of the Holy Ghost.
When the Bull of convocation and the Bull appointing the
conciliary legates were read, Cardinal del Monte declared the
ecumenical council opened, and appointed 7 January as the date
of the second session. Besides the three presiding legates there
were present: Cardinal Madruzza, Bishop of Trent, four
archbishops, twenty-one bishops, five generals of orders. The
council was attended, in addition, by the legates of the King of
Germany, Ferdinand, and by forty-two theologians, and nine
canonists, who had been summoned as consultors.
II. ORDER OF BUSINESS
In the work of accomplishing its great task the council had to
contend with many difficulties. The first weeks were occupied
mainly with settling the order of business of the assembly.
After long discussion it was agreed that the matters to be taken
into consideration by the members of the council were to be
proposed by the cardinal legates; after they had been drawn up
by a commission of consultors (congregatio theologorum minorum)
they were to be discussed thoroughly in preparatory sessions of
special congregations of prelates for dogmatic questions, and
similar congregations for legal questions (congregatio
proelatorum theologorum and congregatio proelatorum
canonistarum). Originally the fathers of the council were
divided into three congregations for discussion of subjects, but
this was soon done away with as too cumbersome. After all the
preliminary discussions the matter thus made ready was debated
in detail in the general congregation (congregatio generalis)
and the final form of the decrees was settled on. These general
congregations were composed of all bishops, generals of orders,
and abbots who were entitled to a vote, the proxies of absent
members entitled to a vote, and the representatives (oratores)
of the secular rulers. The decrees resulting from such
exhaustive debates were then brought forward in the formal
sessions and votes were taken upon them. On 18 December the
legates laid seventeen articles before the general congregations
as regards the order of procedure in the subjects to be
discussed. This led to a number of difficulties. The main one
was whether dogmatic questions or the reform of church life
should be discussed first. It was finally decided that both
subjects should be debated simultaneously. Thus after the
promulgation in the sessions of the decrees concerning the
dogmas of the Church followed a similar promulgation of those on
discipline and Church reform. The question was also raised
whether the generals of orders and abbots were members of the
council entitled to a vote. Opinions varied greatly on this
point. Still, after long discussion the decision was reached
that one vote for the entire order belonged to each general of
an order, and that the three Benedictine abbots sent by the pope
to represent the entire order were entitled to only one vote.
Violent differences of opinion appeared during the preparatory
discussion of the decree to be laid before the second session
determining the title to be given the council; the question was
whether there should be added to the title "Holy Council of
Trent" (Sacrosancta tridentina synodus) the words "representing
the Church universal" (universalem ecclesiam reproesentans).
According to the Bishop of Fiesole, Braccio Martello, a number
of the members of the council desired the latter form. However,
such a title, although justified in itself, appeared dangerous
to the legates and other members of the council on account of
its bearing on the Councils of Constance and Basle, as it might
be taken to express the superiority of the ecumenical council
over the pope. Therefore instead of this formula the additional
phrase " oecumenica et generalis" was proposed and accepted by
nearly all the bishops. Only three bishops who raised the
question unsuccessfully several times later persisted in wanting
the formula "universalem ecclesiam reproesentans". A further
point was in reference to the proxies of absent bishops, namely,
whether these were entitled to a vote or not. Originally the
proxies were not allowed a vote; Paul III granted to those
German bishops who could not leave their dioceses on account of
religious troubles, and to them alone, representation by
proxies. In 1562, when the council met again, Pius IV withdrew
this permission. Other regulations were also passed, in regard
to the right of the members to draw the revenues of their
dioceses during the session of the council, and concerning the
mode of life of the members. At a later date, during the third
period of the council, various modifications were made in these
decisions. Thus the theologians of the council, who had grown in
the meantime into a large body, were divided into six classes,
each of which received a number of drafts of decrees for
discussion. Special deputations also were often appointed for
special questions. The entire regulation of the debates was a
very prudent one, and offered every guarantee for an absolutely
objective and exhaustive discussion in all their bearings of the
questions brought up for debate. A regular courier service was
maintained between Rome and Trent, so that the pope was kept
fully informed in regard to the debates of the council.
III. THE WORK AND SESSIONS
A. First Period at Trent
Among the fathers of the council and the theologians who had
been summoned to Trent were a number of important men. The
legates who presided at the council were equal to their
difficult task; Paceco of Jaen, Campeggio of Feltre, and the
Bishop of Fiesole already mentioned were especially conspicuous
among the bishops who were present at the early sessions.
Girolamo Seripando, General of the Augustinian Hermits, was the
most prominent of the heads of the orders; of the theologians,
the two learned Dominicans, Ambrogio Catarino and Domenico Soto,
should be mentioned. After the formal opening session (13
December, 1545), the various questions pertaining to the order
of business were debated; neither in the second session (7
January, 1546) nor in the third (4 February, 1546) were any
matters touching faith or discipline brought forward. It was
only after the third session, when the preliminary questions and
the order of business had been essentially settled, that the
real work of the council began. The emperor's representative,
Francisco de Toledo, did not reach Trent until 15 March, and a
further personal representative, Mendoza, arrived on 25 May. The
first subject of discussion which was laid before the general
congregation by the legates on 8 February was the Scriptures as
the source of Divine revelation. After exhaustive preliminary
discussions in the various congregations, two decrees were ready
for debate at the fourth session (8 April, 1546), and were
adopted by the fathers. In treating the canon of Scripture they
declare at the same time that in matters of faith and morals the
tradition of the Church is, together with the Bible, the
standard of supernatural revelation; then taking up the text and
the use of the sacred Books they declare the Vulgate to be the
authentic text for sermons and disputations, although this did
not exclude textual emendations. It was also determined that the
Bible should be interpreted according to the unanimous testimony
of the Fathers and never misused for superstitious purposes.
Nothing was decided in regard to the translation of the Bible in
the vernaculars.
In the meantime earnest discussions concerning the question of
church reform had been carried on between the pope and the
legates, and a number of items had been suggested by the latter.
These had special reference to the Roman Curia and its
administration, to the bishops, the ecclesiastical benefices and
tithes, the orders, and the training of the clergy. Charles V
wished the discussion of the dogmatic questions to be postponed,
but the council and the pope could not agree to that, and the
council debated dogmas simultaneously with decrees concerning
discipline. On 24 May the general congregation took up the
discussion of original sin, its nature, consequences, and
cancellation by baptism. At the same time the question of the
Immaculate Conception of the Virgin was brought forward, but the
majority of the members finally decided not to give any definite
dogmatic decision on this point. The reforms debated concerned
the establishment of theological professorships, preaching, and
episcopal obligation of residence. In reference to the latter
the Spanish bishop, Paceco, raised the point whether this
obligation was of Divine origin, or whether it was merely an
ecclesiastical ordinance of human origin, a question which led
later to long and violent discussions. In the fifth session (17
June, 1546) the decree on the dogma of original sin was
promulgated with five canons (anathemas) against the
corresponding erroneous doctrines; and the first decree on
reform (de reformatione) was also promulgated. This treats (in
two chapters) of professorships of the Scriptures, and of
secular learning (artes liberales), of those who preach the
Divine word, and of the collectors of alms.
For the following session, which was originally set for 29 July,
the matters proposed for general debate were the dogma of
justification as the dogmatic question and the obligation of
residence as regards bishops as the disciplinary decree; the
treatment of these questions was proposed to the general
congregation by the legates on 21 June. The dogma of
justification brought up for debate one of the fundamental
questions which had to be discussed with reference to the
heretics of the sixteenth century, and which in itself presented
great difficulties. The imperial party sought to block the
discussion of the entire matter, some of the fathers were
anxious on account of the approaching war of Charles V against
the Protestant princes, and there was fresh dissension between
the emperor and the pope. However, the debates on the question
were prosecuted with the greatest zeal; animated, at times even
stormy, discussions took place; the debate of the next general
session had to be postponed. No less than sixty-one general
congregations and forty-four other congregations were held for
the debate of the important subjects of justification and the
obligation of residence, before the matters were ready for the
final decision. At the sixth regular session on 13 January,
1547, was promulgated the masterly decree on justification (de
justificatione), which consisted of a prooemium or preface and
sixteen chapters with thirty-three canons in condemnation of the
opposing heresies. The decree on reform of this session was one
in five chapters respecting the obligation of residence of
bishops and of the occupants of ecclesiastical benefices or
offices. These decrees make the sixth session one of the most
important and decisive of the entire council.
The legates proposed to the general congregation as the
subject-matter for the following session, the doctrine of the
Church as to the sacraments, and for the disciplinary question a
series of ordinances respecting both the appointment and
official activities of bishops, and on ecclesiastical benefices.
When the questions had been debated, in the seventh session (3
March, 1547), a dogmatic decree with suitable canons was
promulgated on the sacraments in general (thirteen canons), on
baptism (fourteen canons), and on confirmation (three canons); a
decree on reform (in fifteen chapters) was also enacted in
regard to bishops and ecclesiastical benefices, in particular as
to pluralities, visitations, and exemptions, concerning the
founding of infirmaries, and as to the legal affairs of the
clergy. Before this session was held the question of the
prorogation of the council or its transfer to another city had
been discussed. The relations between pope and emperor had grown
even more strained; the Smalkaldic War had begun in Germany; and
now an infectious disease broke out in Trent, carrying off the
general of the Franciscans and others. The cardinal legates,
therefore, in the eighth session (11 March, 1547) proposed the
transfer of the council to another city, supporting themselves
in this action by a Brief which had been given them by the pope
some time before. The majority of the fathers voted to transfer
the council to Bologna, and on the following day (12 March) the
legates went there. By the ninth session the number of
participants had risen to four cardinals, nine archbishops,
forty-nine bishops, two proxies, two abbots, three generals of
orders, and fifty theologians.
B. Period at Bologna
The majority of the fathers of the council went with the
cardinal legates from Trent to Bologna; but fourteen bishops who
belonged to the party of Charles V remained at Trent and would
not recognize the transfer. The sudden change of place without
any special consultation beforehand with the pope did not please
Paul III, who probably foresaw that this would lead to further
severe difficulties between himself and the emperor. As a matter
of fact Charles V was very indignant at the change, and through
his ambassador Vaga protested against it, vigorously urging a
return to Trent. The emperor's defeat of the Smalkaldic League
increased his power. Influential cardinals sought to mediate
between the emperor and the pope, but the negotiations failed.
The emperor protested formally against the transfer to Bologna,
and, refusing to permit the Spanish bishops who had remained at
Trent to leave that city, began negotiations again with the
German Protestants on his own responsibility. Consequently at
the ninth session of the council held at Bologna on 21 April,
1547, the only decree issued was one proroguing the session. The
same action was all that was taken in the tenth session on 2
June, 1547, although there had been exhaustive debates on
various subjects in congregations. The tension between the
emperor and the pope had increased despite the efforts of
Cardinals Sfondrato and Madruzzo. All negotiations were
fruitless. The bishops who had remained at Trent had held no
sessions, but when the pope called to Rome four of the bishops
at Bologna and four of those at Trent, the latter said in excuse
that they could not obey the call. Paul III had now to expect
extreme opposition from the emperor. Therefore, on 13 September,
he proclaimed the suspension of the council and commanded the
cardinal legate del Monte to dismiss the members of the council
assembled at Bologna; this was done on 17 September. The bishops
were called to Rome, where they were to prepare decrees for
disciplinary reforms. This closed the first period of the
council. On 10 Nov., 1549, the pope died.
C. Second Period at Trent
The successor of Paul III was Julius III (1550-55), Giovanni del
Monte, first cardinal legate of the council. He at once began
negotiations with the emperor to reopen the council. On 14 Nov.,
1550, he issued the Bull "Quum ad tollenda," in which the
reassembling at Trent was arranged. As presidents he appointed
Cardinal Marcellus Crescentius, Archbishop Sebastian Pighinus of
Siponto, and Bishop Aloysius Lipomanni of Verona. The cardinal
legate reached Trent on 29 April, 1551, where, besides the
bishop of the city, fourteen bishops from the countries ruled by
the emperor were in attendance; several bishops came from Rome,
where they had been staying, and on 1 May, 1551, the eleventh
session was held. In this the resumption of the council was
decreed, and 1 September was appointed as the date of the next
session. The Sacrament of the Eucharist and drafts of further
disciplinary decrees were discussed in the congregations of the
theologians and also in several general congregations. Among the
theologians were Lainez and Salmeron, who had been sent by the
pope, and Johannes Arza, who represented the emperor.
Ambassadors of the emperor, King Ferdinand, and Henry II of
France were present. The King of France, however, was unwilling
to allow any French bishop to go to the council. In the twelfth
session (1 Sept., 1551) the only decision was the prorogation
until 11 October. This was due to the expectation of the arrival
of other German bishops, besides the Archbishops of Mainz and
Trier who were already in attendance. The thirteenth session was
held on 11 Oct., 1551; it promulgated a comprehensive decree on
the Sacrament of the Eucharist (in eight chapters and eleven
canons) and also a decree on reform (in eight chapters) in
regard to the supervision to be exercised by bishops, and on
episcopal jurisdiction. Another decree deferred until the next
session the discussion of four articles concerning the
Eucharist, namely, Communion under the two species of bread and
wine and the Communion of children; a safe-conduct was also
issued for Protestants who desired to come to the council. An
ambassador of Joachim II of Brandenburg had already reached
Trent.
The presidents laid before the general congregation of 15
October drafts of definitions of the Sacraments of Penance and
Extreme Unction for discussion. These subjects occupied the
congregations of theologians, among whom Gropper, Nausea,
Tapper, and Hessels were especially prominent, and also the
general congregations during the months of October and November.
At the fourteenth session, held on 25 November, the dogmatic
decree promulgated contained nine chapters on the dogma of the
Church respecting the Sacrament of Penance and three chapters on
extreme unction. To the chapters on penance were added fifteen
canons condemning heretical teachings on this point, and four
canons condemning heresies to the chapters on unction. The
decree on reform treated the discipline of the clergy and
various matters respecting ecclesiastical benefices. In the
meantime, ambassadors from several Protestant princes and cities
reached Trent. They made various demands, as: that the earlier
decisions which were contrary to the Augsburg Confession should
be recalled; that debates on questions in dispute between
Catholics and Protestants should be deferred; that the
subordination of the pope to an ecumenical council should be
defined; and other propositions which the council could not
accept. Since the close of the last session both the theologians
and the general congregations had been occupied in numerous
assemblies with the dogma of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and
of the ordination of priests, as well as with plans for new
reformatory decrees. At the fifteenth session (25 January,
1552), in order to make some advances to the ambassadors of the
Protestants, the decisions in regard to the subjects under
consideration were postponed and a new safe-conduct, such as
they had desired, was drawn up for them. Besides the three papal
legates and Cardinal Madruzzo, there were present at Trent ten
archbishops and fifty-four bishops, most of them from the
countries ruled by the emperor. On account of the treacherous
attack made by Maurice of Saxony on Charles V, the city of Trent
and the members of the council were placed in danger;
consequently, at the sixteenth session (23 April, 1552) a decree
suspending the council for two years was promulgated. However, a
considerably longer period of time elapsed before it could
resume its sessions.
D. Third Period at Trent
Julius III did not live to call the council together again. He
was followed by Marcellus II (1555), a former cardinal legate at
Trent, Marcello Cervino; Marcellus died twenty-two days after
his election. His successor, the austere Paul IV (1555-9),
energetically carried out internal reforms both in Rome and in
the other parts of the Church; but he did not seriously consider
reconvening the council. Pius IV (1559-65) announced to the
cardinals shortly after his election his intention of reopening
the council. Indeed, he had found the right man, his nephew, the
Cardinal Archbishop of Milan, Charles Borromeo, to complete the
important work and to bring its decisions into customary usage
in the Church. Great difficulties were raised once more on
various sides. The Emperor Ferdinand desired the council, but
wished it to be held in some German city, and not at Trent;
moreover he desired it to meet not as a continuation of the
earlier assembly but as a new council. The King of France also
desired the assembling of a new council, but he did not wish it
at Trent. The Protestants of Germany worked in every way against
the assembling of the Council. After long negotiations
Ferdinand, the Kings of Spain and Portugal, Catholic
Switzerland, and Venice left the matter to the pope. On 29 Nov.,
1560, the Bull "Ad ecclesiae regimen," by which the council was
ordered to meet again at Trent at Easter, 1561, was published.
Notwithstanding all the efforts of the papal nuncios, Delfino
and Commendone, the German Protestants persisted in their
opposition. Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga was appointed president of
the council; he was to be assisted by the cardinal legates
Stanislaus Hosius, Jacobus Puteus (du Puy), Hieronymus
Seripando, Luigi Simonetta, and Marcus Siticus of Altemps. As
the bishops made their appearance very slowly, the opening of
the council was delayed. Finally on 18 Jan., 1562, the
seventeenth session was held; it proclaimed the revocation of
the suspension of the council and appointed the date for the
next session. There were present, besides the four cardinal
legates, one cardinal, three patriarchs, eleven archbishops,
forty bishops, four abbots, and four generals of orders; in
addition thirty-four theologians were in attendance. The
ambassadors of the princes were a source of much trouble to the
presidents of the council and made demands which were in part
impossible. The Protestants continued to calumniate the
assembly. Emperor Ferdinand wished to have the discussion of
dogmatic questions deferred.
At the eighteenth session (25 Feb., 1562) the only matters
decided were the publication of a decree concerning the drawing
up of a list of forbidden books and an agreement as to a
safe-conduct for Protestants. At the next two sessions, the
nineteenth on 14 May, and the twentieth on 4 June, 1562, only
decrees proroguing the council were issued. The number of
members had, it is true, increased, and various ambassadors of
Catholic rulers had arrived at Trent, but some princes continued
to raise obstacles both as to the character of the council and
the place of meeting. Emperor Ferdinand sent an exhaustive plan
of church reform which contained many articles impossible to
accept. The legates, however, continued the work of the
assembly, and presented the draft of the decree on Holy
Communion, which treated especially the question of Communion
under both species, as well as drafts of several disciplinary
decrees. These questions were subjected to the usual
discussions. At the twenty-first session (16 July, 1562) the
decree on Communion under both species and on the Communion of
children was promulgated in four chapters and four canons. A
decree upon reformation in nine chapters was also promulgated;
it treated ordination to the priesthood, the revenues of canons,
the founding of new parishes, and the collectors of alms.
Articles on the Sacrifice of the Mass were now laid before the
congregations for discussion; in the following months there were
long and animated debates over the dogma. At the twenty-second
session, which was not held until 17 Sept., 1562, four decrees
were promulgated: the first contained the dogma of the Church on
the Sacrifice of the Mass (in nine chapters and nine canons);
the second directed the suppression of abuses in the offering of
the Holy Sacrifice; a third (in eleven chapters) treated reform,
especially in regard to the morals of the clergy, the
requirements necessary before ecclesiastical offices could be
assumed, wills, the administration of religious foundations; the
fourth treated the granting of the cup to the laity at
Communion, which was left to the discretion of the pope.
The council had hardly ever been in as difficult a position as
that in which it now found itself. The secular rulers made
contradictory and, in part, impossible demands. At the same time
warm debates were held by the fathers on the questions of the
duty of residence and the relations of the bishops to the pope.
The French bishops who arrived on 13 November made several
dubious propositions. Cardinals Gonzaga and Seripando, who were
of the number of cardinal legates, died. The two new legates and
presidents, Morone and Navagero, gradually mastered the
difficulties. The various points of the dogma concerning the
ordination of priests were discussed both in the congregations
of the eighty-four theologians, among whom Salmeron, Soto, and
Lainez were the most prominent, and in the general
congregations. Finally, on 15 July, 1563, the twenty-third
session was held. It promulgated the decree on the Sacrament of
Orders and on the ecclesiastical hierarchy (in four chapters and
eight canons), and a decree on reform (in eighteen chapters).
This disciplinary decree treated the obligation of residence,
the conferring of the different grades of ordination, and the
education of young clerics (seminarists). The decrees which were
proclaimed to the Church at this session were the result of long
and arduous debates, in which 235 members entitled to a vote
took part. Disputes now arose once more as to whether the
council should be speedily terminated or should be carried on
longer. In the meantime the congregations debated the draft of
the decree on the Sacrament of Matrimony, and at the
twenty-fourth session (11 Nov., 1563) there were promulgated a
dogmatic decree (with twelve canons) on marriage as a sacrament
and a reformatory decree (in ten chapters), which treated the
various conditions requisite for contracting of a valid
marriage. A general decree on reform (in twenty-one chapters)
was also published which treated the various questions connected
with the administration of ecclesiastical offices.
The desire for the closing of the council grew stronger among
all connected with it, and it was decided to close it as
speedily as possible. A number of questions had been discussed
preliminarily and were now ready for final definition.
Consequently in the twenty-fifth and final session, which
occupied two days (3-4 December, 1563), the following decrees
were approved and promulgated: on 3 December a dogmatic decree
on the veneration and invocation of the saints, and on the
relics and images of the same; a decree on reform (in twenty-two
chapters) concerning monks and nuns; a decree on reform,
treating of the mode of life of cardinals and bishops,
certificates of fitness for ecclesiastics, legacies for Masses,
the administration of ecclesiastical benefices, the suppression
of concubinage among the clergy, and the life of the clergy in
general. On 4 December the following were promulgated: a
dogmatic decree on indulgences; a decree on fasts and feast
days; a further decree on the preparation by the pope of
editions of the Missal, the Breviary, and a catechism, and of a
list of forbidden books. It was also declared that no secular
power had been placed at a disadvantage by the rank accorded to
its ambassadors, and the secular rulers were called upon to
accept the decisions of the council and to execute them.
Finally, the decrees passed by the council during the
pontificates of Paul III and Julius III were read and proclaimed
to be binding. After the fathers had agreed to lay the decisions
before the pope for confirmation, the president, Cardinal
Morone, declared the council to be closed. The decrees were
subscribed by two hundred and fifteen fathers of the council,
consisting of four cardinal legates, two cardinals, three
patriarchs, twenty-five archbishops, one hundred and sixty-seven
bishops, seven abbots, seven generals of orders, and also by
nineteen proxies for thirty-three absent prelates. The decrees
were confirmed on 26 Jan., 1564, by Pius IV in the Bull
"Benedictus Deus," and were accepted by Catholic countries, by
some with reservations.
The Ecumenical Council of Trent has proved to be of the greatest
importance for the development of the inner life of the Church.
No council has ever had to accomplish its task under more
serious difficulties, none has had so many questions of the
greatest importance to decide. The assembly proved to the world
that notwithstanding repeated apostasy in church life there
still existed in it an abundance of religious force and of loyal
championship of the unchanging principles of Christianity.
Although unfortunately the council, through no fault of the
fathers assembled, was not able to heal the religious
differences of western Europe, yet the infallible Divine truth
was clearly proclaimed in opposition to the false doctrines of
the day, and in this way a firm foundation was laid for the
overthrow of heresy and the carrying out of genuine internal
reform in the Church.
J.P. KIRSCH
Trent
Trent
(TRIDENTUM; TRIDENTINA).
Diocese; suffragan of Salzburg. Trent became universally known
through the famous general council held there from 1545 to 1563.
At an earlier date, however, it had a certain historical
importance. In 15 B.C. its territory became subject to the
Romans. As early as 381 there appeared at the Council of
Aquileia Abundantius, Bishop of Trent. While Arianism and the
barbarian invasions elsewhere smothered the seed of the gospel,
it grew in Trent under the care and protection of St. Vigilius.
Bishop Valerian of Aquileia had consecrated the youthful
Vigilius, while the great Ambrose of Milan had instructed him as
to his duties in lengthy, fatherly, epistles. Vigilius came to
his end prematurely; he was stoned to death when barely forty
years of age.
In the sixth century during the Three Chapters controversy, the
Provinces of Milan and Aquileia continued in schism even after
Popes Vigilius and Pelagius I had recognized the decrees of the
Council of Constantinople; through the Patriarch of Aquileia the
bishops of Trent also persisted in the schism. Placed between
Germany and Italy, Trent was exposed to the influences of both.
Ecclesiastically it remained subject to Aquileia until 1751, but
in political affairs it could not withstand the power of the
Salic and Saxon kings and emperors. Under the first Franconian
king, Bishop Ulrich II became an independent prince of the
empire, with the powers and privileges of a duke. In
consideration of imperial favour the bishops of Trent sided with
Henry IV and Frederick I during the great struggle between the
Church and the Empire, but in such a skilful manner so as to
avoid a rupture with the pope. Bishop Adelbert is even revered
as a saint, although he sided with the antipope Victor IV, who
had been chosen by the emperor; in those times of confusion it
was often difficult to find the right path. He died a martyr in
defence of the rights of his see (1177). Under Innocent III,
Friedrich von Wanga raised Trent to the height of its power and
influence. He was a great temporal and ecclesiastical ruler. He
used every means to kindle and strengthen the religious spirit,
and began the building of the splendid Romanesque cathedral. He
died at Acre in 1218 during the Fourth Crusade.
The untimely death of Meinhard III, son of Margaret of Tyrol,
brought Trent under the rule of Austria in 1363. In 1369 Rudolph
IV concluded a treaty with Bishop Albrecht II of Ortenburg, by
virtue of which Rudolph became the real sovereign of the
diocese. The bishop promised in his own name and in that of his
successors to acknowledge the duke and his heirs as lords, and
to render assistance to them against their enemies. Thereafter
Trent ceased to be an independent principality, and became a
part of the Tyrol. Ortenburg's successor was George I of
Liechtenstein, who endeavoured to regain its independence for
the see. His efforts involved him in several wars, terminated
only by his death in 1419. More than once during these wars he
was taken prisoner, while the duke was excommunicated and the
see interdicted.
The much discussed story of the death of St. Simon of Trent
belongs to the reign of Prince-Bishop Johannes IV Hinderbach. On
Holy Thursday of the year 1475, the little child, then about 20
months old, son of a gardener, was missed by its parents. On the
evening of Easter Sunday the body was found in a ditch. Several
Jews, who were accused of the murder, were cruelly tortured.
The sixteenth century was a time of trouble and worry for the
Church in the Tyrol. In the towns the Lutherans, in the villages
and among the peasants the Anabaptists, multiplied. After many
ineffectual efforts, the sovereign, bishops and several monastic
orders combined their authority, and a new order set in, which
reached its climax in the Council of Trent. At the time of the
council Cardinal Christoph von Madrutz was prince-bishop. He was
succeeded by three members of his house, with the last of whom
the house of Madrutz died out. The decrees of the council were
executed but slowly. In 1593 Cardinal Ludwig von Madrutz founded
the seminary, which later was conducted by the Somaschi. The
Jesuits came to Trent in 1622.
Peter Vigil, Count of Thun, governed the see during the
Josephite reforms, with which he was in sympathy. He abolished
some of the monasteries in his territory, interfered with the
constitutions of the various orders, and closed some churches.
When the patriarchate of Aquileia ceased to exist in 1751, Trent
became exempt. During the administration of his successor,
Emmanuel Maria Count of Thun, it ceased to be an independent
ecclesiastical principality (1803). The Bavarian Government
insisted on the following: (1) priests were to be ordained only
after an examination at the university; (2) the bishops were to
order their clergy to obey all orders of the Government in
connection with the ecclesiastical police; (3) when filling
benefices a list of three names was to be presented by the
bishop to the Government or by the Government to the bishop; (4)
recourse to Rome or combination with other bishops was
forbidden. Bishop Emmanuel replied that he would remain true to
his oath to support and defend the privileges of the Church, and
that he would rather suffer all the consequences which might
arise from his refusal rather than act against his conscience.
He was expelled in 1807 and crossed the frontier into Salzburg
at Reichenhall. He could only return after the Tyrolese had
freed themselves of the Bavarian yoke. After the Peace of Viena
negotiation were begun relative to the circumscription of the
dioceses of the Tyrol, and were concluded in 1825. Trent was
made a suffragan of Salzburg, and the bishops, instead of being
chosen by the chapter, were appointed by the emperor. The 115th
Bishop of Trent was Johann Nepomuk Tschiderer. He died on 12
March, 1860, and his canonization is already under way. The
diocese numbers 602,000 Catholics, 1072 priests, 817 male
religious, and 1527 nuns.
Acta Tirolensia, urkundliche Quellen zur Geschichte Tirols (2
vols., 1886, 1899); KINK, Urkundenbuch des Hochstiftes Trient in
Fontes rerum Austriacarum, II (5 vols., Vienna, 1812); ATZ, Der
deutsche Anteil des Bistums Trient (Bozen, 1879); Austria
sancta: Die Heiligen und Seligen Tirols. (Vienna, 1910);
RONELLI, Notizie istorice-critiche delle Chiese di Trento (3
vols., Trent, 1761); PINCIUS, De vitis Pontificum Tridentinorum,
lib. XII (Mantua, 1546); Kurze Geschichte des Bistums und der
Bischofe von Trient (Bozen, 1852).
C. WOLFSGRUBER
Trenton
Trenton
(Trentonensis).
Diocese created 15 July, 1881, suffragan of New York, comprises
Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester,
Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean, Salem, Somerset,
and Warren counties in the State of New Jersey, U.S.A., an area
of about 5,756 square miles. From 1808 to 1853 the territory now
occupied by the Diocese of Trenton covered the lower sections of
what was then known as East and West Jersey, the former
belonging to the jurisdiction of New York and the latter to
Philadelphia. In 1853 the Diocese of Newark was formed, and the
entire State of New Jersey was placed under Bishop James
Roosevelt Bayley, afterwards Archbishop of Baltimore. The
Diocese of Trenton lies between New York and Philadelphia and
has within its confines all the sea coast from Sandy Hook to
Cape May Point, whereon thirty churches have been built to
accommodate the summer visitors to the Jersey coast. The first
Mass said within its territory was celebrated at Woodbridge,
about 1672, and the city of Trenton, in 1814, witnessed the
formation of the first congregation and the erection of the
first church.
The first bishop was the Right Rev. Michael Joseph O'Farrell (b.
at Limerick, Ireland, 2 December, 1832; d. 2 April, 1894).
Bishop O'Farrell completed his classics and philosophy at All
Hallows College, Dublin, and went to St-Sulpice, Paris, where he
made his theology course. He became a Sulpician and was ordained
in his native city by the Most Rev. Dr. Ryan, 18 Aug., 1855. His
superiors sent him to Montreal, Canada, where he taught dogmatic
theology at the Grand Seminary. He left the Congregation of
St-Sulpice and was made rector of St. Peter's Church, New York
City. He took up the work of organizing the new diocese of
Trenton with fifty-one priests, sixty-nine churches, and a
Catholic population of about forty thousand. Soon new parishes
and missions were formed, an orphan asylum was opened at New
Brunswick, and a home for the aged at Beverly. At the Third
Council of Baltimore Bishop O'Farrell was considered one of the
most eloquentr speakers in the American hierarchy. He wrote
pastoral letters on Christian marriage and Christian education.
His remains were at first interred in the cathedral cemetery,
Trenton, but in 1905 were transferred to a vault in the chapel
of St. Michael's Orphan Asylum, Hopewell, New Jersey.
Bishop O'Farrell was succeeded by his chancellor and
vicar-general, the Right Rev. James Augustine McFaul (b. near
Larne, Co. Antrim, Ireland, 6 June, 1850), the second and
present Bishop of Trenton. The latter went with his parents to
America when a few months old. The family dwelt for several
years in New York City and then moved to Bound Brook, New
Jersey. Bishop McFaul made his collegiate course at St.
Vincent's, Beatty, Pennsylvania, and at St. Francis Xavier's,
New York City, his theological studies being made at Seton Hall,
South Orange, New Jersey. He was ordained on 26 May, 1877, and,
when the See of Trenton was erected, was appointed an assistant
priest at St. Mary's church, Trenton, which Bishop O'Farrell
selected as his cathedral. Hence he early became a friend of his
predecessor, by whom he was held in great confidence and by whom
he was appointed pastor of the Church of St. Mary, Star of the
Sea, Long Branch. In October, 1890, he returned to the cathedral
to be its rector and to assist the bishop. He was made secretary
and chancellor, and on 1 November, 1892, was appointed
vicar-general. On the death of Bishop O'Farrell he acted as
administrator of the diocese and on 20 July, of the same year,
was raised to the episcopate, being consecrated in St. Mary's
Cathedral (18 Oct., 1894) by Archbishop Corrigan, from whom,
when Bishop of Newark, he received all his other orders. Being
familiar with the diocese he soon placed it on a splendid
financial basis, and erected many churches, schools, and
institutions, among which are: the orphan asylum, at Hopewell;
the home for the aged, at Lawrenceville; and Mount St. Mary's
College for young ladies, at Plainfield. Bishop McFaul is
organizer of the American Federation of Catholic Societies,
which has a membership of about two million.
Among the most widely known of Bishop McFaul's works are his
pastoral letters, "The Christian Home", "The Christian School",
and "Some Modern Problems", as well as a timely and valuable
brochure on tuberculosis. His address on "The American
Universities", delivered in New York City, June, 1909, revealed
to the American people the fact that the professors of several
of these institutions were advancing ideas in conflict with
morality and the established standards of right and wrong. In
May, 1911, he delivered an address on the Press before several
thousand newspaper men, in St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York
City.
In the Diocese of Trenton there are many nationalities, and the
Gospel is preached in the following languages: English, German,
Italian, Polish, Hungarian, Slovak, Lithuanian, and Rumanian.
The religious communities in the diocese are: men -- Franciscans
(Minor Conventuals), Augustinians, Fathers of the Pious Society
of Missions, Dominicans, Brothers of the Sacred Hearrt, and
Brothers of the Christian Schools (summer only); women --
Sisters of Mercy, Sisters of Charity, Sisters of the Third Order
of St. Francis, Sisters of St. Francis, Mission Helpers of trhe
Sacred Heart, Dominican Sisters of the Perpetual Rosary, Sisters
of St. Dominic, Gray Nuns, Poor Clares, Felician Sisters, School
Sisters of Notre-Dame, Franciscan Sisters of Christian Charity,
Pious Teachers (Pii Filippini), Sisters of the Precious Blood.
General statistics (1911): bishop, 1; secular priests, 167;
regular, 23; churches with resident priests, 124; missions with
churches, 30; stations, 84; chapels, 13; religious women
(including novices and postulants), 372; college (Franciscan) 1,
students, 90; academies for young ladies, 5, pupils, 350;
college for young ladies, 1, students, 87; parishes with
parochial schools, 44, pupils, 12,263; Sunday-schools, 153;
teachers, 900, pupils, 20,364; orphan asylums, 2, orphans, 313;
total number of young people under Catholic care, 13,103:
hospitals, 3, patients treated during 1910, about 7,000;
day-nurseries 2, children, 125; homes for aged, 2, inmates, 100;
Catholic population, about 130,000.
FLYNN, The Catholic Church in New Jersey MORRISTOWN, 1904);
LEAHY, The Diocese of Trenton (Princeton, 1907); MCFAUL,
Memorial of the Rt. Rev. Michael J. O'Farrell; FOX, A Century of
Catholicity in Trenton, N. J.; The Catholic Directory (1852,
1882, 1911).
JAMES J. POWERS
Sir Thomas Tresham
Sir Thomas Tresham
Knight Bachelor (in or before 1524), Grand Prior of England in
the Order of Knights Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem
(1557); date of birth unknown; d. 8 March, 1558-9. The eldest
son of John Tresham of Rushton, Northamptonshire, and Elizabeth,
daughter of Sir James Harrington, of Hornby, Lancashire, he
married (1) Anne, daughter of William, Lord Parr, of Horton, by
whom he had two sons, and (2) Lettice, relict of Sir Robert Lee,
who predeceased him without issue. He was chosen sheriff of
Northamtonshire in 1524, 1539, 1545, and 1555, and returned as
member for the county in 1541 and twice in 1554. He constantly
served on commissions of the peace, of gaol delivery, of oyer
and terminer, of sewers, and the like, and was appointed special
commissioner in 1527 to search for grain, in 1530 to inquire
into Wolsey's possessions, and in 1537 to inquire into the
Lincolnshire rebellion. In 1539 he was one of the knights
appointed to receive Anne of Cleves at Calais. In 1540 he had
licence to impark the Lyveden estate in Aldwinkle St. Peter's
parish, where the "New Bield" erected by his grandson still
stands. In this year, though his main estates were in
Northamptonshire, he had a house with twenty-nine household
servants in Wolfeton, Dorsetshire. In 1544 he supplied men for
the king's army in France, and a little later was one of the
commissioners to collect the "benevolence" for the defence of
the realm. In 1546 he was appointed assessor to the
"Contribution Commission" and was summoned to Court to meet the
French ambassador. In 1549 he assisted in suppressing the
Norfolk rising and received -L-272, 19.6 for his services. He
proclaimed Queen Mary at Northampton on 18 July, 1553, and
accompanied her on her entry into London. He was one of those
appointed on 3 August, 1553, "to staye the assemblies in Royston
and other places of Cambridgeshire". In April, 1554, he conveyed
a prisoner from Peterborough to be examined by the Privy Council
in London. In May, 1554, he was one of the custodians of the
Earl of Devonshire.
Although by Royal Charter dated 2 April, 1557, he was named
grand prior, it was not till 30 November that the order was
re-established in England with four knights under him, and he
was solemnly invested. In the meantime Sir Richard Shelley had
been made turcopolier at Malta. The order was endowed by the
queen with lands to the yearly value of -L-1436. He sat in the
House of Lords in January, 1557-8, and sent his proxy to the
first parliament of Queen Elizabeth. He was buried at Rushton
with great pomp on 16 March, 1558-9.
JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT
Treviso
Treviso
(TARVISINA).
Diocese in Venetia (Northern Italy). The capital is surrounded
by the River Sile; its environs are the favourite summer resort
of the Venetian nobility.
The cathedral, erected in 1141, was transformed in 1485 by
Tullio and Pietro Lombardo, and modernized in 1758 with five
cupolas; the entrance portal dates from 1835. It contains
sculptures by the brothers Bregno and by Antonio Lombardo;
paintings by Paris Bourdone, Titian, and Francesco di Dominicis;
frescoes by Seitz, Pordenone, etc.; and the tombs of Canon
Malchiostro and the Bishop Zanetti. The Church of S. Nicolo,
designed in Gothic style by Fra Nicolo da Smola, was erected by
Benedict XI, who presented it to the Dominicans. It now belongs
to the seminary which occupies the ancient convent of Santa
Maria Maddalena; it has paintings by Paolo Veronese.
Among the civil buildings is the Palazzo dei Trecento (1184)
containing the Galleria Comunale with pictures by Lotto,
Tintoretto, Bordone, Bellini. Natives of Treviso were: the
painters Paris Bordone, Pier Maria and Girolamo Pennacchi; the
historian Odorigo Rinaldi (Raynaldus), continuator of Baronius;
the jurist Bartolommeo Zuccati; the Carmelite Francesco Turchi,
mathematician and architect; and the poet Venantius Fortunatus.
Tarvisium was an ancient city of the Veneti, which became Roman
in 183 B.C. and was a stronghold of the Goths in the Gothic war.
Through the intercession of Bishop Felix the city was spared
during the Lombard invasion (569) and became the seat of a
duchy. Charlemagne made it a marquisate, extending from Belluno
to Ceneda, and from the Adige to the Tagliamento. In 922
Treviso, which was under episcopal jurisdiction, was sacked by
the Hungarians. In 1014 it was organized as a commune ruled by
consuls, with a council of three hundred citizens. A member of
the Lombard league, it later made peace with Barbarossa, who
respected its constitution, but appointed as podesta (1173)
Ezzellino il Monaco. He was expelled, and thereafter the
Ezzelini and Da Canino took turns in the office. Notwithstanding
a war with Padua, Belluno, and Feltre, the city flourished
through its riches, commerce, and the spirit of its inhabitants.
Released from the tyranny of Ezzelino IV (1231-50), Treviso was
an independent commune until Emperor Henry VII in 1309 made
Riccardo da Canino imperial vicar. He was treacherously slain
and succeeded by his son Guecello, against whom a conspiracy was
formed. In 1314-18 Can Grande della Scala of Verona annexed
Treviso to his state, but the inhabitants revolted to Frederick
the Fair of Austria, and afterwards to Louis the Bavarian.
Meanwhile, Guecello Tempesta was proclaimed ruler and liberator
of the city (1328), but after four years he induced the citizens
to recognize the supremacy of Can Grande. Becoming involved in
war with Venice, Treviso was ceded to that city (1338), captured
by Leopold of Austria (1383), sold to the Carrar, lords of
Padua, taken by Gian Galezzo Visconti, Duke of Milan (1404), and
finally returned to Venice. In 1848 the papal troops at Treviso,
commanded by Ferrari, sustained a siege by the Austrians. The
university, established at Treviso in 1317 by Frederick the
Fair, did not flourish. The republic of Venice maintained the
school until the conquest of Padua (1405), with its great
university, resulted in closing the one at Treviso.
Treviso probably received the Gospel from Aquileia. The first
bishop of certain date was Jucundus, who in 421 took part in the
consecration of the church of the Rialto in Venice. The bishops
of Treviso who participated in the schism of the Three Chapters
were: Felix (see above); Rusticus, present at the Council of
Murano (588); and Felix II, who signed the petition to the
Emperor Maurice. In 905 Bishop Adelbert received from King
Berengar the temporal jurisdiction of the city, which extended
to Rozo (969- 1001) and Rolando who adhered to the schism of
Clement III. Bishop Tiso (1212-45) suffered from the tyranny of
Ezzelino, and Alberto Ricco, O. M. (1255), was imprisoned for
preaching against him. Successive bishops were: Loto Gambacurta
(1394), exiled by the Florentines from his archbishopric of
Pisa; Giovanni Benedetti, O. P. (1418), who reformed many
convents of his order and concubinary priests; Ludovico Barbo
(1437), Abbot of S. Giustina of Padua, and reformer of the
Benedictine order; Ermolao Barbaro (1443), a learned and zealous
prelate; Cardinal Pietro Riario, O. M. (1471); Fra Giovanni
Dacri (1478), formerly general of the Franciscans, who restored
the cathedral and reorganized the revenues of the bishopric,
leaving many pious foundations; Nicolo Franco (1486), papal
nuncio in various countries; Francesco Cornaro (1577), who
founded a seminary, introduced the reforms of the Council of
Trent, resigned his see, and was created cardinal; Gian Antonio
Lupo (1646), who conflicted with his canons; Giambattista
Saniedo (1684), zealous and beneficent pastor; Fortunato
Morosini (1710), who enlarged the Seminary; Bernardino Marini
(1788-1817), a canon of the Lateran, present at the Council of
Paris, 1811, who united the abbey nullius of Novisa with the See
of Treviso; and Giuseppe Giapelli, appointed by the Austrian
Government, but not recognized by the Holy See, so that the
diocese remained in turmoil until the death of the candidate.
In 1818 Treviso passed from the metropolitan jurisdiction of
Aquileia (Udine) to that of Venice. Bishop Giuseppe Grasser
(1822) healed the evils caused by the interregnum, Bishop
Antonio Farina (1890) conferred sacred orders on Giuseppe Sarto,
now Pius X. United with Treviso is the ancient Diocese of Asolo,
the bishops of which are unknown from 587 (Agnellus) until 1049
(Ugo), and that of Heraclea (Citt`a Nova), a city founded in the
times of the Byzantine emperor Heraclius, as a refuge for the
inhabitants of Opitergium (Oderzo), who with their bishop
(Magnus) had been exiled by the Lombards. Twenty-six bishops are
known, from 814 until the union of the see with Treviso, 1440.
The Diocese of Treviso has 215 parishes with 386 secular and 30
regular clergy, 5 monasteries, 27 convents, 2 educational
institutions for boys, five for girls, and 414,330 souls.
CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, X; Collectio Historicorum de
Marchia Trevisana (Venice, 1636); VERCI, Storia della Marchia
Trivigiana (Venice, 1789); RIGAMONTI, Descrizione delle pitture
piu celebri nelle chiese di Treviso (Treviso, 1744); RICCATI,
Stato antico e moderno della citta di Asolo (Pesaro, 1763);
SEMENZI, Treviso e la sua prorincia (Treviso, 1862); PICCOTTI, I
Caminesi e la loro signoria in Treviso dal 1283 al 1312
(Leghorn, 1904).
U. BENIGNI
Jewish Tribe
Jewish Tribe
(Phyle, tribus.)
The earlier Hebrew term rendered in our English versions by the
word "tribe" is shebet, while the term matteh, prevails in the
post-exilic writings. The two terms are nearly synonymous,
signifying "branch", "rod", "staff", "sceptre", and in the sense
of "tribe" are used figuratively with probable reference to the
derivation of the tribe as a branch of the family of Jacob
(stirps), or perhaps signifying originally a company led by a
chief with a staff or sceptre.
Arrangement by clans represents a form of social and political
organization natural to Semitic nomads, as may be observed among
the Bedouins of today, and the division of the Jewish people
into twelve tribes is a prominent feature of the Old Testament
records, while frequent allusion to the same is found in the New
Testament writings. There is a difference of opinion among
scholars as to the origin and nature of this most famous of all
known tribal organizations. If the Biblical account of the
patriarchs be accepted as personal (not tribal) history, each of
the twelve tribes owed its origin to direct lineal descent from
one of the sons or grandsons of Jacob. The sons of Jacob by Lia
were Ruben, Simeon, Levi, Juda, Issachar, and Zabulon; and by
Lia's handmaid Zelpha, Gad and Aser, who were legally reputed
according to the custom of the time as children of Lia. Jacob's
sons by Rachel were Joseph and Benjamin, and by Rachel's
handmaid Bala, Dan and Nephtali. The names of all of these, with
the exception of Joseph, were given to their respective groups
of descendants in the tribal organization, but instead of the
tribe of Joseph we find in most of the lists and in the final
traditional classification two tribes named after his two sons,
Ephraim and Manasses.
Thus, in reality, there were thirteen tribes in all but they are
habitually referred to as twelve, doubtless because in the
distribution of the land after the conquest of Palestine only
twelve tribal territories were assigned, the tribe of Levi being
distributed among the others because of its priestly functions
and Divine inheritance. To this may be added the fact that the
sons of Jacob or Israel were twelve, to say nothing of the
probable artificial influence of this mystic number. According
to this traditional view the origin of the tribes was due to the
fact that the descendants of each of these thirteen fathers or
eponyms kept together, forming as many social groups which were
to some extent augmented by the inclusion of foreign slaves and
wives. Another theory, which has prevailed to a considerable
extent among modern scholars, interprets as tribal history and
tradition much of what is told of the patriarchal eponyms in
personal form. The tribes, according to this view, were not
constituted by a subdivision of Israel, but rather the nation
was formed originally by the aggregation of some of the earlier
tribes which had themselves grown out of the union of
pre-existing groups of families and clans. Little is
historically known of the tribal system during the nomadic
period, but it is assumed on general grounds that the
organization was much similar to that of the nomadic Arabs among
whom the unifying forces are chiefly the blood bond and the
tribal or family cult. At the time of the invasion of Palestine
the nation was still in the stage of loose tribal confederation
and the war was waged by tribes and subdivisions of tribes,
sometimes acting separately, sometimes in combination with
others (Judges, i, 3, iv, v). The process of consolidation went
on after the conquest; the kindred families and clans naturally
settled in the same neighbourhood, and finally the complete
tribal organization was evolved with territorial boundaries and
independent historical traditions.
It would seem that prior to the monarchy the tribal districts
varied in number and extent, as may be gathered from the
discrepancies that occur in the Biblical descriptions of their
respective boundaries, nor do they appear to have had any fixed
or continuous political organization. Aggression by a foreign
enemy would unite the clans of a tribe or even several distinct
tribes under a common leader as in the case of Gideon and others
of the judges; but there is no intimation that in times of peace
the tribe was governed by any single chief, though mention is
occasionally made of "ancients" and "princes" (Judges, x, 18;
xi, 5; 1 Kings, iv, 3; xi, 3; 11 Kings, xix, 11; etc.). These
were probably the heads of the clans and families of which the
tribes were composed. After the establishment of the monarchy
the autonomy and importance of the tribe as a political unit
gradually waned, and at length the tribal names came to be
little more than geographical expressions. On the other hand,
veneration for the ancient tribes as social organizations with
their religious and family traditions seems to have increased as
time went on, and not only after the exile but also in the New
Testament times we find much care displayed in recording the
particular tribe or even family to which various persons are
said to belong. The descendants of kings and other noted
Old-Testament personages could, of course, name their tribe, but
in the case of more obscure individuals it is likely that the
tribal indication is inferred from the fact of family residence
in a particular district of Palestine.
JAMES F. DRISCOLL
Diocese of Tricarico
Diocese of Tricarico
(TRICARICENSIS.)
Located in the Province of Potenza in the Basilicata (Southern
Italy), near the River Perrola. In 1694 it was almost destroyed
by earthquake. The cathedral was erected in 968 by Polyeuctos,
Patriarch of Constantinople. The names of the bishops, then of
the Greek Rite, are not known. Of the Latin bishops after the
Norman conquest the first was Arnoldo (1068); others were: the
theologians Palmerio di Gallusio (1253) and Fra Nicolo; Cardinal
Pier Luigi Caraffa (1624), who restored the cathedral and
founded the seminary. From 1805 to 1819 the see remained vacant.
The diocese is suffragan of the metropolitan See of Acerenza and
Matera; it has 25 parishes, 80,540 souls, 180 secular and
regular clergy, one educational institution for boys and one for
girls.
Cappelletti, Le Chiese d'Italia, XX, 481.
U. BENIGNI
Charles Joseph Tricassin
Charles Joseph Tricassin
One of the greatest theologians of the Capuchin Order, b. at
Troyes; d. in 1681. There is but little positive information
about his life. By continued study he acquired a profound
knowledge of the writings of Augustine, and explained and
defended with success his doctrine of grace against the
Jansenists. Tricassin's writings were violently attacked; they
treat exhaustively both the Augustinian doctrine of grace and
that of St. Bonaventure. They comprise in the main: "De
praedestinatione hominum ad gloriam" (Paris, 1669 and 1673), to
which was added "Supplementum Augustinianum" (1673), the work
being intended to prove predestination for foreknown merits; "De
indifferenti lapsi hominis arbitrio sub gratia et
concupiscentia" (Paris, 1673), a thorough explanation of many
Augustinian tenets; "De necessaria ad salutem gratia omnibus et
singulis data" (Paris, 1673), proof of the sufficient grace for
every individual, with special emphasis upon difficult passages
in Augustine's writings on which a full understanding of his
doctrine depends; "De natura peccati originalis" (Paris, 1677);
"De causa bonorum operum" (Paris, 1679), a proof of the virtue
of the hope of eternal life and of the fear of hell; a
"Supplementum" (Paris, 1679) shows that attrition in connection
with the Sacrament of Penance is sufficient according to
Augustine and the Council of Trent. Tricassin also published a
commentary to several of Augustine's works to prove that
Augustine calls the Pelagians heretical teachers, because they
do not concede any necessity of grace for the will. Tricassin
published at Paris in 1678 a French translation with
explanations and applications of Augustine's books, "De gratia
et libero arbitrio", "De correptione et gratia" and also a
treatise to prove that the Cartesian philosophy was contrary to
faith. The importance of the author and his writings is best
shown by the fact that the Jansenists bought up his books and
burned them because they could not answer them.
FATHER ODORICK
Tricca
Tricca
Titular see, suffragan of Larissa in Thessaly. It was an ancient
city of Thessaly, near the River Peneius and on the River
Lethaeus which devastated it in 1907. It is mentioned in Homer
(Iliad, II, 729; IV, 202) as the Kingdom of Machaon and
Podaleirius, sons of AEsculapius and physicians of the Greek
army. It possessed the oldest known temple of AEsculapius, which
was discovered in 1902, with a hospital for pilgrims. Tricca is
mentioned by other writers, but not in connection with important
events. It was a suffragan of Larissa at an early date and
remained so until 1882 when this portion of Thessaly was annexed
to the Kingdom of Greece, Since then the see, which bears the
names of Triccala and Stagoi, is dependent on the Holy Synod of
Athena. Socrates (V 22), Sozomenes (V 12), and Nicephorus
Callistus (XII, 34) say that Heliodorus, probably the same as
the author of the romance of the Ethiopian women or of Theagenes
and Charicles (third century), became Bishop of Tricca. Another
bishop, to whom have been wrongly attributed commentaries on the
Acts of the Apostles, the Epistle of St. Paul and the Catholic
Epistles (for the works published in his name are not his),
lived at the end of the sixth century. He was an Origenist and
Monophysite who wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse (Petrides
"OEcumenius de Tricca, ses oeuvres et son culte" in "Echos
d'Orient", VI, 307-10; Le Quien, "Oriens christ.", I, 117-20).
Some Latin titular bishops in the fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries are also known (Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii
aevi," II, 280; III, 338). Tricca, now Triccala, is the capital
of the nome of the same name and has 28,000 inhabitants: Greeks,
Turks, and Jews.
S. VAILHE
Diocese of Trichinopoly
Diocese of Trichinopoly
(TRICHINOPOLITAN.)
Located in India, suffragan of Bombay, comprises the south east
portion of the peninsula as far as the Western Ghauts by which
it is separated from the dioceses of Verapoly and Quilon;
bounded on the north by the Dioceses of Kumbakonam and
Coimbatore, on the north-east by a portion of the Diocese of
Saint Thomas of Mylapur on the east and south by the sea. In
order to facilitate administration the diocese is divided into
three districts, northern, central, and southern, each under a
superior having his residence at Trichinopoly, Madura, and
Palamcottah respectively; and these districts are again
subdivided into pangus or sections, of which there are in all
fifty-two. The Catholic population, according to the census of
1907, is 245,255, who are served by 60 priests of the Toulouse
province of the Society of Jesus (41 European and 19 native) and
19 native secular priests, helped by 156 catechists. Besides
these, 53 other priests, European and native, are engaged
chiefly in educational work at Trichinopoly, Shembaganur,
Palamcottah, etc. A novitiate, juniorate, and scholasticate of
the Society is established at Shembaganur. There is a
congregation of Brothers of the Sacred Heart (native lay
brothers) engaged in catechetical work and teaching at
Palamcottah, Madura, Panchampetti, and Trichinopoly, and also
the following orders of nuns: Daughters of the Cross of Annecy
at Trichinopoly and Tuticorin; Sisters of St. Joseph of Lyons at
Madura; native nuns of Our Lady of Seven Dolours and native nuns
of St. Anna, both with their novitiate at Trichinopoly; finally
the Oblates -- native women devoted to the baptism of pagan
children and the instruction of village girls. The places of
worship in the diocese amount to 282 churches and 811 chapels.
There are also fifteen churches and some chapels scattered over
the diocese which (by exemption) belong to the padroado
jurisdiction of the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur.
HISTORY
The present diocese comprises a large portion of the ancient
Madura mission, so that down to the year 1836 its history will
be found under MANDURA MISSION. In that year the district was
once entrusted to the Society of Jesus, and its first vicar
Apostolic was appointed in 1845. In 1886, on the establishment
of the hierarchy, the vicariate became a diocese suffragan of
Pondicherry; but in 1893 it was made suffragan of Bombay, as it
still remains. Succession of prelates: Alexis Canoz, S.J., vicar
Apostolic 1847, became first bishop in 1887, in 1888; John Mary
Barthe, S.J., in 1890, resigned on account of failing sight in
1909; A. Faisandier, S.J., coadjutor bishop from 1909.
Educational institutions for boys: St. Joseph's College,
Trichinopoly, first opened at Negapatam in 1846, transferred to
Trichinopoly in 1883, with about 1800 pupils, prepares students
for the degree of M. A. in Madras University; boarding-house for
native Catholic boys; ecclesiastical seminary to prepare boys
for one at Kandy; lower secondary school for Europeans and
Eurasians and seven primary schools for natives, with total of
600 pupils, all at Trichinopoly; St. Xavier's High School,
Palamcottah, with boarding-house and St. Anthony's primary
school; St. Xavier's High School, Tuticorin; St. Mary's High
School, Madura; lower secondary schools at Palamcottah,
Dindigul, Uttamplayama; industrial schools at Trichonopoly,
Irudaiyakulam, and Adaikalaburam; training schools for teachers
at the same places; primary schools in the diocese number 260,
with 11,027 pupils. For girls: St. Joseph's High School and
lower secondary school, Trichinopoly, for European and Eurasian
girls, both under Daughters of the Cross; three secondary
schools for native girls (Trichonopoly) under Sisters of Our
Lady of Seven Dolours, also training schools for mistresses;
lower secondary schools at Palamcottah, Madura, Tuticorin,
Vadakangulam, Manapad, Satankulam primary schools at Dindigul,
Sarakanai and several other villages; industrial school
(Tuticorin) under Daughters of the Cross. Various institutions:
orphanages for children born of pagan parents at Trichinopoly,
Madura, and Adaikalaburam, and one for girls at Pallamcottah;
dispensaries in five places; asylums for native widows at
Trichinopoly, Sarakanai, Adaikalaburam, and for Brahmin widows
at Trichinopoly; St. Mary's Tope, a settlement in Trichinopoly
for Brahmin converts, opened in 1893, has (1912) 45 residents;
catechumenates for men and women in three places, besides
associations of voluntary catechists who give their leisure time
to teaching on Sundays and feasts; St. Joseph's College Press,
which publishes the "Tamil Messenger of the S. Heart", the
"Morning Star", devotional books, etc. There are over 100
sodalities in the diocese.
ERNEST R. HULL
Trichur
Trichur
(TRICHURENSIS.)
Vicariate Apostolic in India, one of the three vicariates of the
Syro-Malabar Rite, bounded on the north by the diocese of
Mangalore, east by the diocese of Coimbature, south by the
Vicariate of Ernaculam, and on the west by the Indian Ocean.
According to the census of 1900 the Catholics of the, Syrian
Rite in the vicariate numbered 91,998, having 63 churches and 23
chapels served by 66 native secular priests. There are also
three monasteries of Tertiary Carmelite monks at Elthuruth,
Ampalacad, and Paratti, containing about 20 professed and 11 lay
brothers, besides a number of novices; also four convents for
Carmelite nuns with 31 professed besides novices, postulants and
lay sisters. There are in the vicariate 2 high schools, 2 lower
secondary schools, and 184 elementary schools, the number of
children under training being 19,093. A seminary at Trichur
prepares candidates for Puthenpally or Kandy. The vicar
Apostolic (John Menacherry, appointed 1896) resides at Trichur.
For the ancient history of the Christians of the Syro-Malabar
Rite see THOMAS CHRISTIANS. They remained under the jurisdiction
partly of Cranganore, till 1887, when on the establishment of
the hierarchy, the churches of the Syrian Rite were separated
from those of the Latin Rite and placed under two vicars
Apostolic with their centres at Trichur and Kottayam
respectively. Later on, in 1896, a new division was made and
three vicariates established, viz. of Trichur, Ernaculam, and
Changanacherry. These three vicariates cover the same ground as
the Archdiocese of Verapoly, the Archbishop of Verapoly
exercising territorial jurisdiction over all Christians of the
Latin Rite, while the vicars Apostolic hold personal and
quasi-territorial jurisdiction over all of the Syrian Rite. The
vicariates are nominally classed as belonging to the province of
Verapoly, but without the usual ecclesiastical connection.
(See CHANGANACHERRY, VICARIATE APOSTOLIC OF; VERAPOLY,
ARCHDIOCESE OF; DAMAO, DIOCESE OF; EASTERN CHURCHES; THOMAS
CHRISTIANS.)
Madras Catholic Directory, 1910.
ERNEST R. HULL
Tricomia
Tricomia
Titular see, suffragan of Caesarea in Palaestina Prima. It is
mentioned in George of Cyprus (Descriptio orbis romani, ed.
Gelzer, 1024) and, according to the other cities preceding or
following its name, would seem to have been situated in southern
Palestine. Malalas (Chronographia, V, in P.G., XCVII, 236)
relates an ancient legend regarding Tricomia, which he calls
Nyssa and confounds with Scythopolis. According to his account
it was the site of a famous temple of Artemis. It was never a
Greek see, and Le Quien (Oriens Christ., III, 677) is at fault
in his complaint of being unable to find any bishops. The Roman
Curia, taking the "Descriptio orbis romani" of George of Cyprus,
a civil document, for a "Notitia episcopatuum", has made
Tricomia a titular see. It is now a Mussulman village called
Terkoumieh on a high hill between Hebron and Bet-Djibrin. It
must not be confused with another Tricomia in Arabia which was
the camping place of the equites promoti Illyriciani.
S. VAILHE
Triduum
Triduum
(Three days).
A time frequently chosen for prayer or for other devout
practices, whether by individuals in private, or in public by
congregations or special organizations in parishes, in religious
communities, seminaries, or schools. The form of prayer or
devotion depends upon the occasion or purpose of the triduum.
The three days usually precede some feast, and the feast then
determines the choice of the pious execises. In liturgical usage
there is a triduum of ceremonies and prayers in Holy Week; the
Rogation Days (q.v.); the three days of litanies prior to the
feast of the Ascension, and the feasts of Easter and Pentecost,
with the first two days of their octaves. There is
ecclesiastical authorization for a triduum in honour of the Holy
Trinity, of the Holy Eucharist, and of St. Joseph. The first of
these, instituted Pius IX, 8 August, 1847, may be made at any
time of the year in public or private, and partial or plenary
indulgences are attached to it on the usual conditions. The
second, also indulgenced, was instituted by Pius X, 10 April,
1907, for the purpose of promoting frequent Communion. The time
for it is Friday, Saturday, and Sunday after the feast of Corpus
Christi, though the bishops may designate any other more
convenient time of the year. Each day there should be a sermon
on the Holy Eucharist and Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament,
and on Sunday, there should be besides a sermon on the Gospel
and on the Holy Eucharist, at the parochial Mass. This triduum
is specially for cathedral churches, though the bishops may also
require other churches to have it. The prayer, "O Most Sweet
Jesus" (Dulcissime Jesu), as given in the "Raccolta", is
appointed for reading during Benediction. The triduum in honor
of St. Joseph, prior to his feast on 19 March, was recommended
by Leo XIII in the Encyclical "Quamprimum pluries" (15 August,
1889), with the prayer, "To thee, O blessed Joseph." The most
frequent occasions for a triduum are: when children are in
preparation for their first Communion; among pupils in school at
the beginning of the scholastic year; among seminarians at the
same time; and in religious communities for those who are to
renew their vows yearly or every six months. The exercises of
these triduums are mainly meditations or instructions disposing
the hearers to a devout reception of the sacraments of penance
and of Holy Communion and to betterment of life.
ST. JOHN, The Raccolta (6th ed., London, 1912); BERINGER, Die
Ablasse, ihr Wesen u. Gebrauch (Paderborn, 1900, tr., Fr.,
Paris, 1905).
JOHN J. WYNNE
Diocese of Trier
Trier
(TREVIRENSIS)
Diocese; suffragan of Cologne; includes in the Prussian province
of the Rhine the governmental department of Trier, with the
exception of two districts administered by mayors, and the
governmental department of Coblenz with the exception of ten
such districts that belong to the Archdiocese of Cologne; it
also includes the Principality of Birkenfeld belonging to the
Grand Duchy of Oldenburg (see map to article GERMANY). The
diocese is divided into 46 deaneries, each administered by a
dean and a definitor. In 1911 it comprised 750 parishes, 28
parishes administered by vicars, 200 chaplaincies and similar
offices, 70 administrative and school offices. In 1912 there
were 711 parish priests, 28 parish vicars, 210 chaplains and
curates, 122 ecclesiastics in other positions (administration
and schools), 65 priests either retired or on leave of absence,
105 clergy belonging to the orders, 1,249,700 Catholics, and
450,000 persons of other faiths. In most of the country
districts the population is nearly entirely Catholic; in the
mining and manufacturing districts on the Saar, as well as on
the Hunsrueck and in the valley of the Nahe River, the Catholic
faith is not so predominant. The cathedral chapter has the right
to elect the bishop; besides the bishop there is also an
auxiliary bishop. The chapter consists of a provost, a dean (the
auxiliary bishop), 8 cathedral canons, 4 honorary canons; 6
curates are also attached to the cathedral. The educational
institutions of the diocese for the clergy are the episcopal
seminar for priests at Trier, which has a regent, 7 clerical
professors, and 220 students, and the gymnasial seminaries for
boys at Trier and Pr m.
Since the close of the Kulturkampf the religious orders have
prospered greatly, and in 1911 there were in the diocese: a
Benedictine Abbey at Maria-Laach containing 26 fathers, 80
brothers; a Franciscan monastery on the Apollinarisberg at
Reimagen, 9 fathers, 8 brothers; 2 houses of the Capuchins, 18
fathers, 12 brothers; 1 house of the Oblates, 5 fathers, 21
brothers; 2 houses of the Pallotines, 9 fathers, 24 brothers; 1
house of the Redemptorists, 9 fathers, 8 brothers; 1 house of
the White Fathers, 5 fathers, 5 brothers; 1 house of the Fathers
of the Divine Word, 21 fathers, 50 brothers; 126 Brothers of
Charity in 4 houses, and 144 Brothers of St. Francis in 7
houses. The female orders and congregations in the diocese in
1911 were: Benedictine Nuns of the Perpetual Adoration, 1 house
with 37 sisters; Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo, 71 houses with
500 sisters; Servants of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, 4 houses, 41
sisters; Serving-Maids of Christ, 30 houses, 193 sisters;
Dominican Nuns, 2 houses, 69 sisters; Sisters of St. Francis
from the mother-houses at Aachen, Heithuizen, Olpe, and
Waldbreitbach, 94 houses, 476 sisters; Capuchin Nuns, 1 house,
10 sisters; Sisters of St. Clement, 1 house, 6 sisters; Nuns of
the Visitation, 1 house, 50 sisters; Sisters of the Holy Spirit,
47 houses, 300 sisters; Sisters of the Love of the Good
Shepherd, 2 houses, 125 sisters; Sisters of the Poor Child
Jesus, 1 house, 9 sisters; Sisters of St. Joseph, 1 house, 20
sisters; Ursuline Nuns, 5 houses, 220 Sisters; Sisters of St.
Vincent de Paul, 7 houses; 30 sisters. The most important church
of the diocese is the cathedral, the oldest church of a
Christian bishop on German soil. The oldest section of the
building goes back to the Roman era and was a church as early as
the fourth century. In the course of time other parts were added
which belong to all forms of architecture, although the
Romanesque style preponderates. The cathedral contains the
remains of twenty-five archbishops and electors as well as those
of the last four bishops of Trier. The most precious of its
numerous treasures is the Holy Coat of Christ, which, according
to legend, was given to the Church of Trier by St. Helena. Two
exhibitions of this venerable relic are worthy of special note:
that of 1844, connected with the rise of the sect of German
Catholics, and the one held in 1891, which attracted over two
million pilgrims. Other noted churches in Trier are: the Church
of Our Lady, one of the most beautiful ecclesiastical monuments
of Gothic architecture, built 1227-43; the Church of St.
Paulinus or of the Martyrs, the burial place of Bishop Paulinus,
erected in 1734 in Rococo style to replace the old church
destroyed by the French in l674; the thirteenth-century
Romanesque church of the former Benedictine Abbey of St.
Matthias, containing the grave of St. Matthias, the only grave
of an Apostle in Germany; it is much visited by pilgrims. Other
noted churches of the diocese are: the churches of St. Castor
and Our Lady at Coblenz, the abbey church of Maria-Laach, the
old monastery churches of Pr m, M nstermaifeld, and Merzig; the
Church of St. Maria at Oberwesel, the Gothic churches of
Andernach, Boppard, Remagen, Sinzig, and of other places on the
Rhine and the Moselle.
HISTORY
The beginnings of the see of Trier are obscure. From the time of
Diocletian reorganization of the divisions of the empire, Trier
was the capital of Belgica Prima, the chief city of Gaul, and
frequently the residence of the emperors. There were Christians
among its population as early as the second century, and there
was probably as early as the third century a bishop at Trier,
which is the oldest episcopal see in Germany. The first clearly
authenticated bishop is Agricius who took part in the Council of
Arles in 314. His immediate successors were St. Maximinus who
sheltered the excommunicated St. Athanasius at Trier, and St.
Paulinus, who was exiled to Phrygia on account of his opposition
to Arianism. Little is known of the later bishops up to the
reign of Charlemagne; during this intervening period the most
important ones were St. Nicetius (527-66) and Magnericus (d.
596), the confidant of the Merovingian king, Childebert II. The
bishops during the reign of Charlemagne were: Wiomad (757-91),
who accompanied the emperor on his campaign against the Avars;
Richbod (792-804), one of Alcuin's pupils; and Amalarius
Fortunatus (809-14), sent by Charlemagne as ambassador to
Constantinople, and the author of liturgical writings.
Charlemagne's will proves that Trier at this era was an
archdiocese; Metz, Toul, and Verdun are mentioned as its
suffragans. In 772 Charlemagne granted Wiomad complete immunity
from the jurisdiction of the ruling count for all the churches,
monasteries, villages, and castles belonging to the Church of
St. Peter at Trier. In 816 Louis the Pious confirmed to
Archbishop Hetti (814-47) the privileges of protection and
immunity granted by his father. At the partition of the Frankish
empire at Verdun in 843, Trier fell to Lothair's empire; at the
partition of Lothair's empire at Mersen in 870, it fell to the
East-Frankish kingdom which later became the German Empire.
However, after the death of Louis the Child, the lords of
Lorraine separated from the East-Frankish Kingdom and became
vassals of the West-Frankish ruler King Charles the Simple,
until Henry I conquered the country for Germany again.
Archbishop Ratbod (883-915) received in 898 complete immunity
from all state taxes for the entire episcopal territory from the
King of Lorraine and Burgundy, Swentibold, son of Emperor
Arnulf. He obtained from Louis the Child the district and city
of Trier, the right to have a mint and to impose customs-duties;
from Charles the Simple he gained the right of a free election
of the Bishop of Trier. In this way the secular possessions of
the bishops of Trier, which had sprung from the valuable
donations of the Merovingian and Carlovingian rulers, were
raised to a secular principality. Archbishop Ratbert (931-56),
brother-in-law of King Henry I, was confirmed by Otto I in all
the temporal rights gained by his predecessors.
Archbishop Poppo (1016-47), son of Margrave Leopold of Austria,
did much to enlarge the territory owned by the church of Trier.
During the strife over Investiture, Engelbert of Ortenburg
(1078-1101) and Bruno of Laufen (1102-24) belonged to the
imperial party. Albero of Montreuil (1131-52) had, as Archdeacon
of Metz, opposed lay Investiture; during his administration the
cathedral school of Trier reached its highest fame. From about
1100 the Archbishop of Trier was the Arch-Chancellor of Gaul,
for the German emperor, and thus became the possessor of an
imperial office and an Elector of the German king and emperor.
As the archbishops of Trier were among the leading spiritual
princes of the empire, they became involved in all the struggles
between pope and emperor. While Hillin (1152-69) was a partisan
of Frederick Barbarossa, Arnold I (1169-83) made successful
efforts to bring about a reconciliation between the emperor and
pope (1177). John I (1190-1212) was excommunicated by Innocent
III on account of his adherence to King Philip of Swabia; Bishop
John increased the possessions of the archdiocese by gaining
several countships and castles. Theodoric II of Wied (1212-42)
belonged to the party of Frederick II, while Arnold II of
Isenburg (1242-59) opposed the emperor. Henry II of Vinstingen
(1260-86) was the first Archbishop of Trier who took part in the
election of a German emperor as one of the seven Electors; the
electoral dignity, together with the right to the first vote,
was confirmed by the Golden Bull in 1356. As in other German
dioceses, so also in Trier, the rising cities, especially Trier
and Coblenz, sought to rid themselves of the suzerainty of the
bishop. Such attempts were crowned with considerable success
during the rule of Archbishop Diether of Nassau (1300-07),
brother of King Adolph of Nassau. On the other hand, Baldwin of
Luxembourg (1308-54), the most noted of the medieval archbishops
of Trier, was able to restore and raise the importance of the
See of Trier by his wide-reaching activity both in secular and
spiritual affairs. He brought the cities of Coblenz and Trier
under his suzerainty again, and was the actual organizer of his
possessions as an electoral state. Werner of Falkenstein
(1388-1418), one of Baldwin's successors, acquired Limburg on
the Lahn; during the great Western Schism he held loyally to
Gregory XII. After the death of Otto of Ziegenhain (1418-30),
who laboured zealously for the reform of the Church, there was a
double election; upon this Pope Martin V appointed a third
person archbishop. During the struggle of the candidates to
secure the diocese it suffered severely. James of Sierck
(1439-56) sought to restore order in the confused finances of
the diocese. He was deposed by Eugenius IV as an adherent of the
Council of Basle and of the Antipope Felix V, who was elected
there. However, the deposition had no effect as the German
Electors opposed it. John II, Margrave of Baden (1456-1503),
promoted the reform of the Church. He left the diocese heavily
in debt, and these debts were increased by his great-nephew and
successor, James II of Baden (1503-11).
The Reformation limited the spiritual jurisdiction of the
Archdiocese of Trier. Although the energetic Richard von
Greiffenklau (1511-31) vigorously opposed the Reformation, still
he could not prevent the new doctrine from gaining a foothold in
the district of the Hunsr ck, and in that on the right bank of
the Rhine. He defeated the attacks of Franz von Sickingen upon
the city of Trier, as well as the efforts of that city to become
independent of the bishop. In 1512 he exhibited the Holy Coat
for the first time and spent the donations of the pilgrims on
the cathedral. John II von Metzenhausen (1531-40) attempted
reforms which were frustrated by his death. John II von Hagen
(1541-47) sent a representative to the Council of Trent and
began earnest measures of reform. John V von Isenburg (1547-56)
attended the council himself, but was recalled home by the
incursion of Margrave Albrecht of Brandenburg-Ansbach into the
archdiocese, which the margrave devastated horribly. John VI von
der Leyen (1556-67) was able to regain Trier, but could not
prevent the French from taking possession of his three suffragan
dioceses, Metz, Toul, and Verdun. He checked the further spread
of the new doctrines by calling the Jesuits into his diocese
(1561). James III von Eltz (1567-81) and John VII von
Schoenenberg (1581-99) carried out in their possessions the
reformatory decrees of the Council of Trent. The former secured
the administration of the Abbey of Pruem, whereby the secular
possessions of the archdiocese reached their final extent; the
latter established two seminaries at Coblenz and Trier. Lothair
von Metternich (1599-1623) joined the Catholic League in order
to secure the stability of the Catholic Church in Germany. In
this way his see became involved in the Thirty Years War. His
successor, Philip Christopher von S tern (1623-52), withdrew
from the League, formed an alliance with France, and permitted
the French to garrison the fortress of Ehrenbreitstein. When he
made advances to the Swedes he was captured by the Spanish
troops in 1635 under suspicion of heresy, and was kept a
prisoner at Vienna until 1645. In the struggle between the
imperial troops and the French the archdiocese was often
devastated. Charles Caspar von der Leyen (1652-76) had scarcely
repaired the damage done by the Thirty Years War by an excellent
administration, when the marauding wars of Louis XIV of France
brought fresh misery upon the country. John Hugo von Orsbeck
(1676-1711) refused to recognize the seizure of some of his
territories and their incorporation into France by Louis XIV
through what was called the "reunions", neither would take the
oath of loyalty to Louis. Consequently, during the years 1684-97
large parts of the see were garrisoned by French troops.
During the long period of peace in the eighteenth century the
archdiocese had excellent rulers. Francis Louis von
Pfalz-Neuburg (1716-29) gave particular attention to the
organization of the administration of justice, and raised the
decaying university by establishing new professorships. Francis
George von Sch nborn (1729-56) encouraged learned studies and
founded a university library and building. The short
administration of John Philip von Walderdorf (1756-68) was
followed by the reign of the last Elector of Trier, Clement
Wenceslaus, Duke of Saxony (1768-1812), who was also Bishop of
Augsburg. He gained a reputation by improving the schools and
reforming the monasteries, but, on the other hand, influenced by
the ideas of the "Enlightenment", he supported Febronianism,
shared in the labours of the Congress of Ems (q.v.), and also
was involved in the dispute about the nunciatures (see NUNCIO).
After the outbreak of the French Revolution the territories of
Trier, especially Coblenz, became the gathering place of the
French emigres. In 1794 Trier and Coblenz were besieged by the
French. In 1797, by the Peace of Campo-Formio, the part of the
archdiocese on the left bank of the Rhine was ceded to France;
in 1797 the university was suppressed. In 1801 the Peace of
Luneville gave to France, in addition, the fortress of
Ehrenbreitstein. When the German Church was secularized in 1803,
the section of the archdiocese on the right bank of the Rhine
was also secularized and the greater part of it was incorporated
into Nassau. Clemens Wenceslaus renounced his rights in return
for an annual pension of 100,000 gulden and withdrew to the
Diocese of Augsburg. An ecclesiastical administration, which
lasted until 1824, was established in Ehrenbreitstein for the
part of the former archdiocese on the right bank of the Rhine.
The French Diocese of Trier was established in 1801 for the
section of the former archdiocese which had been ceded to
France. It embraced hardly a third of the old diocese and was
made suffragan to Mechlin. Its first and only bishop was Charles
Mannay (1802-16). The Congress of Vienna gave the territory
included in this diocese once more to Germany, largely to
Prussia and the Grand Duchy of Oldenburg. In 1816 Bishop Charles
Mannay resigned his office and retired to France, where he died
in 1824 as Bishop of Rennes. For six years the see remained
vacant, the administration being conducted in the interim by
Hubert Anthony Corden as vicar-general, from 1818 as vicar
Apostolic. On the reorganization of the Catholic Church in
Prussia in 1821, Trier was revived as a simple diocese by the
Bull "De salute animarum", made suffragan to Cologne, and
received about its present territory. In 1824 it contained 531
parishes with 580,000 Catholics.
The first bishop of the new diocese was Joseph von Hommer
(1824-36). The election of his successor, William Arnoldi
(1842-64) which took place in 1839 and was renewed in 1842, was
not recognized by the Government until Frederick William IV
ascended the throne. Arnoldi did a great deal for the
reawakening of Catholic consciousness in Germany. The exhibition
of the Holy Coat, which he brought about in 1844, led to the
forming of the sect called German Catholics. He was succeeded by
Leopold Pelldram (1865-67), formerly chaplain general of the
Prussian army, who was followed by Matthias Eberhard (1867-76),
who enjoys the honours of a Confessor of the Faith. Eberhard was
one of the first to suffer by the Kulturkampf which broke out in
Prussia. After being repeatedly condemned to pay heavy fines he
was sentenced on 6 March, 1876, to ten months imprisonment.
Trier was one of the dioceses that suffered the most during the
Kulturkampf. The number of its parishes robbed of their parish
priests amount to 197, while nearly 294,000 Catholics lacked
regular spiritual care. After the death of the bishop on 30 May,
1876, the see was vacant for five years and had to be secretly
administered by an Apostolic Delegate. Finally in 1881, through
the personal efforts of Leo XIII, an agreement was made with the
Prussian Government, and Mich l Felix Korum (cathedral canon and
parish priest of the minster at Strasburg) was appointed Bishop
of Trier by the pope, consecrated at Rome on 19 August, and
enthroned on 25 September. Up to the present day the bishop has
sought to repair the damage inflicted upon his diocese by the
Kulturkampf, through the confessional, the pulpit, and religious
associational life. He has founded religious institutions for
education, and promoted the establishment of numerous houses of
the orders. The exhibition of the Holy Coat in 1891 which he
carried out was the occasion for impressive demonstrations of
Catholic faith and life in Germany (cf. Korum, "Wunder und
Gnadenerweise, die sich bei der Austellung 1891 zugetragen
haben", Trier, 1894).
A complete bibliography is to be found in MARX, Trevirensia.
Literaturkunde zur Gesch. der Trierer Lande (Trier, 1909). Most
important works are: BROUWER AND MASENIUS, Antiquitatum et
annalium Trevirensium libri XXV (Li ge, 1670-71); HONTHEIM,
Hist. Trevirensis diplomatica et pragmatica (Augsburg and W
rzburg, 1750); IDEM, Prodromus Hist. Trevirensis (1757); Gesta
Trevirorum, ed. WYTTENBACH AND M LLER (Trier,1836-39); MARX,
Gesch. des Erzstifts Trier (5 vols., Trier, 1858-1864); G RZ,
Regesten der Erzbisch fe zu Trier von Hetti bis Johann II,
814-1503 (Trier, 1859-61); IDEM Mittelrheinische Regesten
(Coblenz, 1876-86); Codex diplomaticus Rheno-Mosellanus, ed. G
NTHER (5 vols. Coblenz, 1822-26); Urkundenbuch zur Gesch. der
mittelrheinischen Territorien, ed. ZEYER, ELTESTER, AND G RZ
(Coblenz, 1860-74); DE LORENZI, Beitr ge zur Gesch. s mtlicher
Pfarreien der Di zese Trier (Trier, 1887); SAUERLAND, Trier
Geschichtsquellen (Trier, 1889); IDEM, Urkunden u. Regesten zur
Gesch. der Rheinlande aus dem vatikansichen Archiv (4 vols.,
Bonn, 1902-07); SCHORN, Eiflia illustrata (Bonn, 1888-1892);
NEY, Die Reformation in Trier 1559 ihre Entstehung (Leipzig and
Halle, 1906-07); VON SCHR TTER, Die M nzen von Trier, II (Bonn,
1908); BASTGEN, Die Gesch. des Trierer Domkapitels im
Mittelalter (Paderborn, 1910); EWALD, Die Siegel der Erzbisch fe
von Trier (Bonn, 1910). On art and architecture: VON WILMOWSKY,
Der Dom zu Trier (Trier, 1874); IDEM, Die Grabst tten der
Erzbisch fe von Trier (Trier, 1876); BEISSEL, Gesch. der Trierer
Kirchen (1888-89); KR GER AND KENTENICH, Trier zur R merzeit u.
im Mittelalter (Leipzig, 1911); VON SCHLEINITZ, Trier (Leipzig,
1909). One of the series, Ber hmte Kunst tten; CRAMER, Das r
mische Trier (G tersloh, 1911). Most important periodicals:
Trierisches Archiv (Trier, 1898----), and its supplementary
numbers (Trier, 1901----); Westdeutsche Zeitschrift f r Gesch.
u. Kunst (Trier, 1882----), with supplementary numbers.
JOSEPH LINS
Francis a Paula Triesnecker
Francis a Paula Triesnecker
Astronomer, b. at Kirchberg on the Wagram, in Lower Austria, 2
April, 1745; d. at Vienna 29 January, 1817. At the age of
sixteen he entered the Society of Jesus, and, after several
years' study of philosophy (Vienna) and mathematics (Tyrnau), he
taught at various Jesuit colleges. After the suppression of the
Society he went to Gras, where he completed his theological
studies and was ordained shortly afterwards. He soon attained a
reputation as a mathematician and astronomer and was appointed
assistant to the director of the Vienna Observatory, Father Max
Hell, whom he succeeded in 1792. He occupied this post during
the remainder of his life. Triesnecker was thoroughly grounded
in the science of mathematics and its applications to astronomy;
and the accuracy of his observations, which in spite of
ill-health he pursued till an advanced age, was universally
recognized. His numerous treatises mainly deal with geography
and astronomy. A considerable portion of his time was taken up
by the "Ephemerides" of Vienna, the editorship of which, after
Father Hell's death, he shared with the ingenious computer Burg.
In this periodical he published, between the years 1787-1806,
his "Tabulae Mercurii, Martis, Veneris, Solares", and the
greater part of his micrometrical observations of the sun, moon,
planets, and positions of stars. His "Novae motuum lunarium
tabulae" were published separately in 1802. Other astronomical
investigations may be found in "Zach's monatliche
Correspondenz", in the "Commentarii soc. leg. Goetting.", and in
Bode's "Astron. Jahrbuch". In geography he determined or
corrected the longitude and latitude of various places from the
best available data. The results of this labour are embodied in
the periodicals referred to above, the "Transactions of the
Royal Soc. of Bohemia", and Zach's "Allgemeine geographische
Ephemeriden". He completed Father Metzburg's triangulation of
lower Austria, using it as a basis for the production of a new
map of that country, and assisted him with the triangulation of
Galicia. The erection of the "New Observatory" of Vienna (which
afterwards gave place to the new structure on the
"Turkenschanze") was Triesnecker's work. He was a member of the
scientific associations of Breslau, Goettingen, Munich, St.
Petersburg, and Prague.
J. STEIN
Triest-Capo d'Istria
Triest-Capo d'Istria
(TERGESTINA ET JUSTINOPOLITANA.)
Suffragan diocese of Goerz-Gradiska; exists as a triple see
since 1821, when Cittanova (AEmonia) and Capodistria (AEgida,
Capris, Justinopolis) were united to Triest, and its present
name was assigned to the see.
St. Frugifer, consecrated in 524, was the first Bishop of
Triest; since then it exhibits a long line of eighty-seven
bishops. Despite their high character and great abilities,
however, these bishops only in rare instances attained to
eminence, owing to the small size of their diocese, which was
subject to Aquileia, and to the rivalry between Aquileia and
Venice. Foremost among the bishops is Enea Silvio de'
Piccolomini, later Pope Pius II. Petrus Bonomo, a secretary of
Frederick IV and Maximilian I, became Bishop of Triest in 1502,
and was known as pater concilii in the fifth Lateran Council
(1512). Giovanni Bogarino, teacher of Archduke Charles of
Styria, was bishop from 1591. Joseph II abolished the Diocese of
'Triest in 1788, transferring the see to Gradiska. His brother,
Leopold II, divided Gradiska into the Dioceses of Gorz and
Triest, re-establishing Triest in 1791 and appointing as its
bishop, Sigismund Anton, Count of Hohenwart and tutor of his
children. Other attempts were made to suppress the see, but the
emperor decreed its preservation, and von Buset was appointed
bishop. After his death (1803) the see remained vacant eighteen
years, owing to the disorders caused by Napoleon. Emperor Franz
finally appointed Leonardi as Bishop of Triest. At the Synod of
Vienna in 1849, Bartholomew Legat was present; he defended, with
considerable fervour, the views of the minority in the Vatican
Council. In 1909 Bishop Franz X. Nagi was appointed coadjutor
cum jure successionis to the ninety-year-old Cardinal
Prince-Archbishop Anton Gruscha of Vienna. The see numbers
409,800 Catholics with 291 priests, 81 male religious and 174
nuns.
COeLESTIN WOLFSGRUBER
Trincomalee
Trincomalee
(TRINCOMALIENSIS.)
Located in Ceylon, suffragan of Colombo, was created in 1893 by
a division of the diocese of Jaffna. The diocese comprises the
whole of the eastern province as well as the district of
Tamankuduwa. Out of a total population of 186,251 the Catholics
number 8773, with 28 churches and chapels served by 13 fathers
and two lay brothers of the Belgian province of the Society of
Jesus, with two missionaries Apostolic. Candidates for the
priesthood are sent to Kandy seminary. There are fifty-five
schools with 2523 pupils, and one convent of the Sisters of St.
Joseph of Cluny with five inmates who conduct an orphanage
attached to the convent. The bishop is Charles Lavigne, S.J.
(consecrated 1887), who resides at Trincomalee.
Madras Catholic Directory, 1910.
ERNEST R. HULL
Abbey of Trinita di Cava Dei Tirreni
Abbey of Trinit`a di Cava dei Tirreni
Located in the Province of Salerno. It stands in a gorge of the
Finestre Hills near Cava dei Tirreni, and was founded in 980 by
Alferio Pappacarbona, a noble of Salerno who became a Cluniac
monk. Urban II endowed this monastery with many privileges,
making it immediately subject to the Holy See, with jurisdiction
over the surrounding territory. In 1394 Boniface IX made it a
diocese, but in 1513 Leo X erected the Diocese of Cava,
detaching that city from the abbot's jurisdiction. About the
same time the Cluniacs were replaced by Cassinese monks. This
monastery, an abbey nullius, possesses a very rich store of
public and private documents, which date back to the eighth
century, and is now the seat of a national educational
establishment, under the care of the Benedictines. The church is
famous for its organ. In 1893 the cultus of the first four
abbots (Alferius, Leo, Petrus, and Constabilis) was sanctioned.
There are 18 parishes with 68 priests, regular and secular, and
28,000 faithful, subject to the abbacy.
U. BENIGNI
Order of Trinitarians
Order of Trinitarians
The redemption of captives has always been regarded in the
Church as a work of mercy, as is abundantly testified by many
lives of saints who devoted themselves to this task. The period
of the Crusades, when so many Christians were in danger of
falling into the hands of infidels, witnessed the rise of
religious orders vowed exclusively to this pious work. In the
thirteenth century there is mention of an order of Montjoie,
founded for this purpose in Spain, but its existence was brief,
as it was established in 1180 and united in 1221 with the Order
of Calatrava. Another Spanish order prospered better; this was
founded in the thirteenth century by St Peter Nolasco under the
title of Our Lady of Mercy (de la Merced), whence the name
Mercedarians. It soon spread widely from Aragon, and has still
several houses at Rome, in Italy, Spain, and the old Spanish
colonies. Finally, the Order of Trinitarians, which exists to
the present day, had at first no other object, as is recalled by
the primitive title: "Ordo S. Trinitatis et de redemptione
captivorum". its founder, St. John of Math, a native of Provence
and a doctor of the University of Paris, conceived the project
under the pious inspiration of a pious solitary, St Felix of
Valois, in a hermitage called Cerfroid, which subsequently
became the chief house of the order. Innocent III, though little
in favor of new orders, granted his approbation to this
enterprise in a Bull of 17 December, 1198.
The primitive rule, which has been in turns mitigated or
restored, enacted that each house should comprise seven
brothers, one of whom should be superior; the revenues of the
house should be divided into three parts, one for the monks, one
for the support of the poor, and one for the ransom of captives;
finally it forbade the monks when journeying to use a horse,
either through humility, or because horses were forbidden to
Christians in the Mussulman countries, whither the friars had to
go; hence their popular name of "Friars of the Ass".
In France the Trinitarians were as much favoured by the kings as
by the popes. St. Louis installed a house of their order in his
chateau of Fontainebleu. He chose Trinitarians as his chaplains,
and was accompanied by them on his crusades. Their convent in
Paris is dedicated to St. Mathurin; hence they are also known in
France as Mathurins. Founded in 1228, the Paris house soon
eclipsed Cerfroid, the cradle of the Trinitarians, and
eventually became the residence of the general, also called
grand minister, of the order. Towards the end of the twelfth
century the order had 250 houses throughout Christendom, where
its benevolent work was manifested by the return of liberated
captives. This won for it many alms in lands and revenues, a
third of which was used for ransoms. But the chief source was
collections; and to make these fruitful it was not considered
enough to attach indulgences to the almsdeed, recourse was had
to theatrical demonstrations to touch hearts and open purses.
The misfortunes of the unhappy captives in the Mussulman
countries were the readiest subjects for descriptions, sermons,
and even tableaux. In Spain these alms-quests were made
solemnly: the religious on their mules were preceded by
trumpeters and cymbal-players, and a herald proclaimed the
redemption by inviting families to make known their kinsfolk in
captivity and the alms destined for their ransom.
From the fourteenth century the Trinitarians had lay assistants,
i.e., charitable collectors, authorised by letters patent to
solicit alms for the order in their respective towns; these were
called marguilliers. There were also confraternities of the Holy
Trinity, chiefly in the towns where the order had no convent;
these consisted of lay tertiaries who wore the scapular of the
order, were associated with its spiritual favours, and devoted a
portion of their income to its work. In fact the Trinitarians
had considerable resources to meet the needs of their work. The
funds being collected, the ransomers to the number of three or
four set sail from Provence or Spain with objects to alleviate
the lot of the captives or coax their jailers. Their destination
was usually the Barbary States, especially in the sixteenth
century when the corsairs of Tunis, Algiers, and Morocco
infested the Mediterranean and made plunder their chief means of
existence. The Mercedarians went chiefly to Morocco, while the
Trinitarians went preferably to Tunis or Algiers. There began
their trials. They had to confront the dangers of the journey,
the endemic diseases of the African coast, exposed to the
outrages of the natives, sometimes to burst of Mussulman
fanaticism, which cost several lives. The most delicate part of
the task lay in the choice of captives amid the solicitations
with which the monks were besieged and the negotiations for
settling the ransom-price between the corsairs and the
Trinitarians, between the exactions of the former and the
limited resources of the latter. When the sum was not
sufficient, the Trinitarians were held as hostages in the place
of the captives until the arrival of fresh funds. The choice of
captives was made according to the funds; ransom was first paid
for the natives of the regions which had contributed to the
redemption. Sometimes certain captives were previously indicated
by their family who paid the ransom. When the captives returned
to Europe, the Trinitarians had them go in procession from town
to town amid scenery intended to impress the imagination in
justification of the use of the alms and to inspire fresh
almsdeeds. The number of those ransomed during the three
centuries is estimated at 90,000. The most famous of these was
Cervantes (ransomed in 1580), who at his death was buried among
the trinitarians at Madrid in a habit of a Trinitarian tertiary.
Despite the large sums of money which passed through their
hands, the Trinitarians had to struggle constantly with poverty.
They had to defray the expenses of numerous hospitals, as well
as to administer parochial charges. They suffered greatly in
France during the English invasion of the fifteenth century and
the wars of religion of the sixteenth. Moreover, there were
conflicts between the Mercedarians, who had spread from Spain to
France, and the Trinitarians, who had spread from France to
Spain. They contested each other's right to collect and receive
legacies: attempts at fusion failed, and their rivalry gave rise
to numerous suits in both countries and to a whole controversial
literature. Their poverty resulted in a relaxation of the rules
which had often to be revised, and in divisions in the order.
While one party followed the mitigated rule, there was a reform
party which aimed at a return to the primitive observance. Thus
arose the first schism in 1578 at Pontoise, which in 1633
succeeded in entering the mother-house at Cerfroid.
About the same time the Trinitarians of Spain formed a schism by
separating from the Trinitarians of France under Father Juan
Bautista of the Immaculate Conception; the latter added fresh
austerity to their rule by founding the Congregation of
"Discalced Trinitarians of Spain". This rule spread to Italy and
Austria (1690), where the ransom of captives was much esteemed
during the constant wars with the Turks. Hence the three
congregations, which gave rise to regrettable dissensions. The
Discalced also went to France, where they were suppressed by a
Papal Bull in 1771. The division between those observing the
mitigated and the reformed rule was terminated by uniting
without fusing them under a common general. At this time also
they began to lay claim in France to the title by which they
have since been known: Canons Regular of the Holy Trinity. The
Revolution of 1789 suppressed them in all the territories to
which they had spread. Joseph II had already suppressed them in
1784 in Austria and the Low Countries. They have retained a few
houses in Italy, Spain, and the Spanish colonies. At Rome, where
the convent of St. Thomas was united with the chapter of St.
Peter in 1387, the Trinitarians protested many times
unsuccessfully against this spoliation, when on the occasion of
the seventh centenary of the foundation of the order in 1898,
the chapter of St. Peter's voluntarily restored it. But their
chief house is the Basilica of St. John Chrysogonus which was
given to them by Pius IX in 1856.
There have always been nuns attached to the hospitals of the
order, but they do not seem to have formed an integral part of
it. The true Trinitarian Sisters were founded in Spain by Maria
de Romero in 1612 and they still have convents at Madrid and in
other cities. They form part of the discalced congregation.
The Trinitarians wear a white habit, with a cross of which the
upright is red and the cross bar blue.
CH. MOELLER
The Blessed Trinity
The Blessed Trinity
This article is divided as follows:
I. Dogma of the Trinity;
II. Proof of the Doctrine from Scripture;
III. Proof of the Doctrine from Tradition;
IV. The Trinity as a Mystery;
V. The Doctrine as Interpreted in Greek Theology;
VI. The Doctrine as Interpreted in Latin Theology.
I. THE DOGMA OF THE TRINITY
The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine
of the Christian religion -- the truth that in the unity of the
Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from
another. Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father
is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet
there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of
Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal
generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal
procession from the Father and the Son. Yet, notwithstanding
this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and
co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This, the
Church teaches, is the revelation regarding God's nature which
Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the
world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her
whole dogmatic system.
In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three
Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which
the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in
Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity
of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom ("Ad. Autol.", II,
15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time.
Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in
Tertullian ("De pud." c. xxi). In the next century the word is
in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps.
xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of
Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes
pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:
There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in
the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it
once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the
Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the
Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever
(P. G., X, 986).
It is manifest that a dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine
revelation. When the fact of revelation, understood in its full
sense as the speech of God to man, is no longer admitted, the
rejection of the doctrine follows as a necessary consequence.
For this reason it has no place in the Liberal Protestantism of
today. The writers of this school contend that the doctrine of
the Trinity, as professed by the Church, is not contained in the
New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second
century and received final approbation in the fourth, as the
result of the Arian and Macedonian controversies. In view of
this assertion it is necessary to consider in some detail the
evidence afforded by Holy Scripture. Attempts have been made
recently to apply the more extreme theories of comparative
religion to the doctrine ot the Trinity, and to account for it
by an imaginary law of nature compelling men to group the
objects of their worship in threes. It seems needless to give
more than a reference to these extravagant views, which serious
thinkers of every school reject as destitute of foundation.
II. PROOF OF DOCTRINE FROM SCRIPTURE
A. New Testament
The evidence from the Gospels culminates in the baptismal
commission of Matthew 28:20. It is manifest from the narratives
of the Evangelists that Christ only made the great truth known
to the Twelve step by step. First He taught them to recognize in
Himself the Eternal Son of God. When His ministry was drawing to
a close, He promised that the Father would send another Divine
Person, the Holy Spirit, in His place. Finally after His
resurrection, He revealed the doctrine in explicit terms,
bidding them "go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"
(Matthew 28:18). The force of this passage is decisive. That
"the Father" and "the Son" are distinct Persons follows from the
terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of
the Holy Spirit in the same series, the names being connected
one with the other by the conjunctions "and . . . and" is
evidence that we have here a Third Person co-ordinate with the
Father and the Son, and excludes altogether the supposition that
the Apostles understood the Holy Spirit not as a distinct
Person, but as God viewed in His action on creatures.
The phrase "in the name" (eis to onoma) affirms alike the
Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature. Among the Jews
and in the Apostolic Church the Divine name was representative
of God. He who had a right to use it was invested with vast
authority: for he wielded the supernatural powers of Him whose
name he employed. It is incredible that the phrase "in the name"
should be here employed, were not all the Persons mentioned
equally Divine. Moreover, the use of the singular, "name," and
not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are that One
Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed. Indeed the unity
of God is so fundamental a tenet alike of the Hebrew and of the
Christian religion, and is affirmed in such countless passages
of the Old and New Testaments, that any explanation inconsistent
with this doctrine would be altogether inadmissible.
The supernatural appearance at the baptism of Christ is often
cited as an explicit revelation of Trinitarian doctrine, given
at the very commencement of the Ministry. This, it seems to us,
is a mistake. The Evangelists, it is true, see in it a
manifestation of the Three Divine Persons. Yet, apart from
Christ's subsequent teaching, the dogmatic meaning of the scene
would hardly have been understood. Moreover, the Gospel
narratives appear to signify that none but Christ and the
Baptist were privileged to see the Mystic Dove, and hear the
words attesting the Divine sonship of the Messias.
Besides these passages there are many others in the Gospels
which refer to one or other of the Three Persons in particular
and clearly express the separate personality and Divinity of
each. In regard to the First Person it will not be necessary to
give special citations: those which declare that Jesus Christ is
God the Son, affirm thereby also the separate personality of the
Father. The Divinity of Christ is amply attested not merely by
St. John, but by the Synoptists. As this point is treated
elsewhere (see JESUS CHRIST), it will be sufficient here to
enumerate a few of the more important messages from the
Synoptists, in which Christ bears witness to His Divine Nature.
+ He declares that He will come to be the judge of all men
(Matthew 25:31). In Jewish theology the judgment of the world
was a distinctively Divine, and not a Messianic, prerogative.
+ In the parable of the wicked husbandmen, He describes Himself
as the son of the householder, while the Prophets, one and
all, are represented as the servants (Matthew 21:33 sqq.).
+ He is the Lord of Angels, who execute His command (Matthew
24:31).
+ He approves the confession of Peter when he recognizes Him,
not as Messias -- a step long since taken by all the Apostles
-- but explicitly as the Son of God: and He declares the
knowledge due to a special revelation from the Father (Matthew
16:16-17).
+ Finally, before Caiphas He not merely declares Himself to be
the Messias, but in reply to a second and distinct question
affirms His claim to be the Son of God. He is instantly
declared by the high priest to be guilty of blasphemy, an
offense which could not have been attached to the claim to be
simply the Messias (Luke 22:66-71).
St. John's testimony is yet more explicit than that of the
Synoptists. He expressly asserts that the very purpose of his
Gospel is to establish the Divinity of Jesus Christ (John
20:31). In the prologue he identifies Him with the Word, the
only-begotten of the Father, Who from all eternity exists with
God, Who is God (John 1:1-18). The immanence of the Son in the
Father and of the Father in the Son is declared in Christ's
words to St. Philip: "Do you not believe, that I am in the
Father, and the Father in Me?" (14:10), and in other passages no
less explicit (14:7; 16:15; 17:21). The oneness of Their power
and Their action is affirmed: "Whatever he [the Father] does,
the Son also does in like manner" (5:19, cf. 10:38); and to the
Son no less than to the Father belongs the Divine attribute of
conferring life on whom He will (5:21). In 10:29, Christ
expressly teaches His unity of essence with the Father: "That
which my Father hath given me, is greater than all . . . I and
the Father are one." The words, "That which my Father hath given
me," can, having regard to the context, have no other meaning
than the Divine Name, possessed in its fullness by the Son as by
the Father.
Rationalist critics lay great stress upon the text: "The Father
is greater than I" (14:28). They argue that this suffices to
establish that the author of the Gospel held subordinationist
views, and they expound in this sense certain texts in which the
Son declares His dependence on the Father (5:19; 8:28). In point
of fact the doctrine of the Incarnation involves that, in regard
of His Human Nature, the Son should be less than the Father. No
argument against Catholic doctrine can, therefore, be drawn from
this text. So too, the passages referring to the dependence of
the Son upon the Father do but express what is essential to
Trinitarian dogma, namely, that the Father is the supreme source
from Whom the Divine Nature and perfections flow to the Son. (On
the essential difference between St. John's doctrine as to the
Person of Christ and the Logos doctrine of the Alexandrine
Philo, to which many Rationalists have attempted to trace it,
see Logos.)
In regard to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, the
passages which can be cited from the Synoptists as attesting His
distinct personality are few. The words of Gabriel (Luke 1:35),
having regard to the use of the term, "the Spirit," in the Old
Testament, to signify God as operative in His creatures, can
hardly be said to contain a definite revelation of the doctrine.
For the same reason it is dubious whether Christ's warning to
the Pharisees as regards blasphemy against the Holy Spirit
(Matthew 12:31) can be brought forward as proof. But in Luke
12:12, "The Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you
must say" (Matthew 10:20, and Luke 24:49), His personality is
clearly implied. These passages, taken in connection with
Matthew 28:19, postulate the existence of such teaching as we
find in the discourses in the Cenacle reported by St. John
(14-16). We have in these chapters the necessary preparation for
the baptismal commission. In them the Apostles are instructed
not only as the personality of the Spirit, but as to His office
towards the Church. His work is to teach whatsoever He shall
hear (16:13) to bring back their minds the teaching of Christ
(14:26), to convince the world of sin (16:8). It is evident
that, were the Spirit not a Person, Christ could not have spoken
of His presence with the Apostles as comparable to His own
presence with them (14:16). Again, were He not a Divine Person
it could not have been expedient for the Apostles that Christ
should leave them, and the Paraclete take His place (16:7).
Moreover, notwithstanding the neuter form of the word (pneuma),
the pronoun used in His regard is the masculine ekeinos. The
distinction of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son
is involved in the express statements that He proceeds from the
Father and is sent by the Son (15:26; cf. 14:16, 26).
Nevertheless, He is one with Them: His presence with the
Disciples is at the same time the presence of the Son (14:17,
18), while the presence of the Son is the presence of the Father
(14:23).
In the remaining New Testament writings numerous passages attest
how clear and definite was the belief of the Apostolic Church in
the three Divine Persons. In certain texts the coordination of
Father, Son, and Spirit leaves no possible doubt as to the
meaning of the writer. Thus in II Corinthians 13:13, St. Paul
writes: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of
God, and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all."
Here the construction shows that the Apostle is speaking of
three distinct Persons. Moreover, since the names God and Holy
Ghost are alike Divine names, it follows that Jesus Christ is
also regarded as a Divine Person. So also, in I Corinthians
12:4-11: "There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit;
and there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord: and
there are diversities of operations, but the same God, who
worketh all [of them] in all [persons]." (Cf. also Ephesians
4:4-6; I Peter 1:2-3.)
But apart from passages such as these, where there is express
mention of the Three Persons, the teaching of the New Testament
regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit is free from all ambiguity.
In regard to Christ, the Apostles employ modes of speech which,
to men brought up in the Hebrew faith, necessarily signified
belief in His Divinity. Such, for instance, is the use of the
Doxology in reference to Him. The Doxology, "To Him be glory for
ever and ever" (cf. I Chronicles 16:38; 29:11; Psalm 103:31;
28:2), is an expression of praise offered to God alone. In the
New Testament we find it addressed not alone to God the Father,
but to Jesus Christ (II Timothy 4:18; II Peter 3:18; Revelations
1:6; Hebrews 13:20-21), and to God the Father and Christ in
conjunction (Revelations 5:13, 7:10). Not less convincing is the
use of the title Lord (Kyrios). This term represents the Hebrew
Adonai, just as God (Theos) represents Elohim. The two are
equally Divine names (cf. I Corinthians 8:4). In the Apostolic
writings Theos may almost be said to be treated as a proper name
of God the Father, and Kyrios of the Son (see, for example, I
Corinthians 12:5-6); in only a few passages do we find Kyrios
used of the Father (I Corinthians 3:5; 7:17) or Theos of Christ.
The Apostles from time to time apply to Christ passages of the
Old Testament in which Kyrios is used, for example, I
Corinthians 10:9 (Numbers 21:7), Hebrews 1:10-12 (Psalm
101:26-28); and they use such expressions as "the fear of the
Lord" (Acts 9:31; II Corinthians 5:11; Ephesians 5:21), "call
upon the name of the Lord," indifferently of God the Father and
of Christ (Acts 2:21; 9:14; Romans 10:13). The profession that
"Jesus is the Lord" (Kyrion Iesoun, Romans 10:9; Kyrios Iesous,
I Corinthians 12:3) is the acknowledgment of Jesus as Jahweh.
The texts in which St. Paul affirms that in Christ dwells the
plenitude of the Godhead (Colossians 2:9), that before His
Incarnation He possessed the essential nature of God (Philemon
2:6), that He "is over all things, God blessed for ever" (Romans
9:5) tell us nothing that is not implied in many other passages
of his Epistles.
The doctrine as to the Holy Spirit is equally clear. That His
distinct personality was fully recognized is shown by many
passages. Thus He reveals His commands to the Church's
ministers: "As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting,
the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas . .
." (Acts 13:2). He directs the missionary journey of the
Apostles: "They attempted to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of
Jesus suffered them not" (Acts 16:7; cf. Acts 5:3; 15:28; Romans
15:30). Divine attributes are affirmed of Him.
+ He possesses omniscience and reveals to the Church mysteries
known only to God (I Corinthians 2:10);
+ it is He who distributes charismata (I Cor., 12:11);
+ He is the giver of supernatural life (II Cor., 3:8);
+ He dwells in the Church and in the souls of individual men, as
in His temple (Romans 8:9-11; I Corinthians 3:16, 6:19).
+ The work of justification and sanctification is attributed to
Him (I Cor., 6:11; Rom., 15:16), just as in other passages the
same operations are attributed to Christ (I Cor., 1:2; Gal.,
2:17).
To sum up: the various elements of the Trinitarian doctrine are
all expressly taught in the New Testament. The Divinity of the
Three Persons is asserted or implied in passages too numerous to
count. The unity of essence is not merely postulated by the
strict monotheism of men nurtured in the religion of Israel, to
whom "subordinate deities" would have been unthinkable; but it
is, as we have seen, involved in the baptismal commission of
Matthew 28:19, and, in regard to the Father and the Son,
expressly asserted in John 10:38. That the Persons are
co-eternal and coequal is a mere corollary from this. In regard
to the Divine processions, the doctrine of the first procession
is contained in the very terms Father and Son: the procession of
the Holy Spirit from the Father and Son is taught in the
discourse of the Lord reported by St. John (14-17) (see Holy
Ghost).
B. Old Testament
The early Fathers were persuaded that indications of the
doctrine of the Trinity must exist in the Old Testament and they
found such indications in not a few passages. Many of them not
merely believed that the Prophets had testified of it, they held
that it had been made known even to the Patriarchs. They
regarded it as certain that the Divine messenger of Genesis
16:7, 18, 21:17, 31:11; Exodus 3:2, was God the Son; for reasons
to be mentioned below (III. B.) they considered it evident that
God the Father could not have thus manifested Himself (cf.
Justin, "Dial.", 60; Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", IV, xx, 7-11;
Tertullian, "Adv. Prax.", 15-16; Theoph., "Ad Autol.", ii, 22;
Novat., "De Trin.", 18, 25, etc.). They held that, when the
inspired writers speak of "the Spirit of the Lord", the
reference was to the Third Person of the Trinity: and one or two
(Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", II, xxx, 9; Theophilus, "Ad. Aut.", II,
15; Hippolytus, "Con. Noet.", 10) interpret the hypostatic
Wisdom of the Sapiential books, not, with St. Paul, of the Son
(Hebrews 1:3; cf. Wisdom, vii, 25, 26), but of the Holy Spirit.
But in others of the Fathers is found what would appear to be
the sounder view, that no distinct intimation of the doctrine
was given under the Old Covenant. (Cf. Gregory Nazianzen, "Or.
theol.", v, 26; Epiphanius, "Ancor." 73, "Haer.", 74; Basil,
"Adv. Eunom.", II, 22; Cyril Alex., "In Joan.", xii, 20.)
Some of these, however, admitted that a knowledge of the mystery
was granted to the Prophets and saints of the Old Dispensation
(Epiph., "Haer.", viii, 5; Cyril Alex., "Con. Julian.," I). It
may be readily conceded that the way is prepared for the
revelation in some of the prophecies. The names Emmanuel (Isaias
7:14) and God the Mighty (Isaias 9:6) affirmed of the Messias
make mention of the Divine Nature of the promised deliverer. Yet
it seems that the Gospel revelation was needed to render the
full meaning of the passages clear. Even these exalted titles
did not lead the Jews to recognize that the Saviour to come was
to be none other than God Himself. The Septuagint translators do
not even venture to render the words God the Mighty literally,
but give us, in their place,"the angel of great counsel." A
still higher stage of preparation is found in the doctrine of
the Sapiential books regarding the Divine Wisdom. In Proverbs 8,
Wisdom appears personified, and in a manner which suggests that
the sacred author was not employing a mere metaphor, but had
before his mind a real person (cf. verses 22, 23). Similar
teaching occurs in Ecclus., 24, in a discourse which Wisdom is
declared to utter in "the assembly of the Most High", i. e. in
the presence of the angels. This phrase certainly supposes
Wisdom to be conceived as person. The nature of the personality
is left obscure; but we are told thnt the whole earth is
Wisdom's Kingdom, that she finds her delight in all the works of
God, but that Israel is in a special manner her portion and her
inheritance (Ecclus., 24:8-13).
In the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon we find a still further
advance. Here Wisdom is clearly distinguished from Jehovah: "She
is. . .a certain pure emanation of the glory of the almighty
God. . .the brightness of eternal light, and the unspotted
mirror of God's majesty, and the image of his goodness" (Wisdom
7:25-26. Cf. Hebrews 1:3). She is, moreover, described as "the
worker of all things" (panton technitis, 7:21), an expression
indicating that the creation is in some manner attributable to
her. Yet in later Judaism this exalted doctrine suffered
eclipse, and seems to have passed into oblivion. Nor indeed can
it be said that the passage, even though it manifests some
knowledge of a second personality in the Godhead, constitutes a
revelation of the Trinity. For nowhere in the Old Testament do
we find any clear indication of a Third Person. Mention is often
made of the Spirit of the Lord, but there is nothing to show
that the Spirit was viewed as distinct from Jahweh Himself. The
term is always employed to signify God considered in His
working, whether in the universe or in the soul of man. The
matter seems to be correctly summed up by Epiphanius, when he
says: "The One Godhead is above all declared by Moses, and the
twofold personality (of Father and Son) is strenuously asuerted
by the Prophets. The Trinity is made known by the Gospel"
("Haer.", Ixxiv).
III. PROOF OF THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION
A. The Church Fathers
In this section we shall show that the doctrine of the Blessed
Trinity has from the earliest times been taught by the Catholic
Church and professed by her members. As none deny this for any
period subsequent to the Arian and Macedonian controversies, it
will be sufficient if we here consider the faith of the first
four centuries only. An argument of very great weight is
provided in the liturgical forms of the Church. The highest
probative force must necessarily attach to these, since they
express not the private opinion of a single individual, but the
public belief of the whole body of the faithful. Nor can it be
objected that the notions of Christians on the subject were
vague and confused, and that their liturgical forms reflect this
frame of mind. On such a point vagueness was impossible. Any
Christian might be called on to seal with his blood his belief
that there is but One God. The answer of Saint Maximus (c. A.D.
250) to the command of the proconsul that he should sacrifice to
the gods, "I offer no sacrifice save to the One True God," is
typical of many such replies in the Acts of the martyrs. It is
out of the question to suppose that men who were prepared to
give their lives on behalf of this fundamental truth were in
point of fact in so great confusion in regard to it that they
were unaware whether their creed was monotheistic, ditheistic,
or tritheistic. Moreover, we know that their instruction
regarding the doctrines of their religion was solid. The writers
of that age bear witness that even the unlettered were
thoroughly familiar with the truths of faith (cf. Justin,
"Apol.", I, 60; Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", III, iv, n. 2).
(1) Baptismal formulas
We may notice first the baptismal formula, which all acknowledge
to be primitive. It has already been shown that the words as
prescribed by Christ (Matthew 28:19) clearly express the Godhead
of the Three Persons as well as their distinction, but another
consideration may here be added. Baptism, with its formal
renunciation of Satan and his works, was understood to be the
rejection of the idolatry of paganism and the solemn
consecration of the baptised to the one true God (Tert., "De
spect.", iv; Justin, "Apol.", I, iv). The act of consecration
was the invocation over them of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit. The supposition that they regarded the Second and Third
Persons as created beings, and were in fact consecrating
themselves to the service of creatures, is manifestly absurd.
St. Hippolytus has expressed the faith of the Church in the
clearest terms: "He who descends into this laver of regeneration
with faith forsakes the Evil One and engages himself to Christ,
renounces the enemy and confesses that Christ is God . . . he
returns from the font a son of God and a coheir of Christ. To
Whom with the all holy, the good and lifegiving Spirit be glory
now and always, forever and ever. Amen" ("Serm. in Theoph.", n.
10).
The doxologies
(2) The witness of the doxologies is no less striking. The form
now universal, "Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to
the Holy Ghost," so clearly expresses the Trinitarian dogma that
the Arians found it necessary to deny that it had been in use
previous to the time of Flavian of Antioch (Philostorgius,
"Hist. eccl.", III, xiii). It is true that up to the period of
the Arian controversy another form, "Glory to the Father,
through the Son, in the Holy Spirit," had been more common (cf.
I Clement, 58, 59; Justin, "Apol.", I, 67). This latter form is
indeed perfectly consistent with Trinitarian belief: it,
however, expresses not the coequality of the Three Persons, but
their operation in regard to man. We live in the Spirit, and
through Him we are made partakers in Christ (Galatians 5:25;
Romans 8:9); and it is through Christ, as His members, that we
are worthy to offer praise to God (Heb. 13:15). But there are
many passages in the ante-Nicene Fathers which show that the
form, "Glory be to the Father and to the Son, and to [with] the
Holy Spirit," was also in use.
+ In the narrative of St. Polycarp's martyrdom we read: "With
Whom to Thee and the Holy Spirit be glory now and for the ages
to come" (Mart. S. Polyc., n.14; cf. n. 22).
+ Clement of Alexandria bids men "give thanks and praise to the
only Father and Son, to the Son and Father with the Holy
Spirit" (Paed., III, xii).
+ St. Hippolytus closes his work against Noetus with the words:
"To Him be glory and power with the Father and the Holy Spirit
in Holy Church now and always for ever and ever. Amen" (Contra
Noet., n. 18).
+ Denis of Alexandria uses almost the same words: "To God the
Father and to His Son Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit be
honour and glory forever and ever, Amen" (in St. Basil, "De
Spiritu Sancto", xxix, n. 72).
+ St. Basil further tells us that it was an immemorial custom
among Christians when they lit the evening lamp to give thanks
to God with prayer: Ainoumen Patera kai Gion kai Hagion Pneuma
Theou ("We praise the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit
of God").
(3) Other patristic writings
The doctrine of the Trinity is formally taught in every class of
ecclesiastical writing. From among the apologists we may note
Justin, "Apol." I, vi; Athenagoras, "Legat: pro Christ.", n. 12.
The latter tells us that Christians "are conducted to the future
life by this one thing alone, that they know God and His Logos,
what is the oneness of the Son with the Father, what the
communion of the Father with the Son, what is the Spirit, what
is the unity of these three, the Spirit, the Son, and the
Father, and their distinction in unity." It would be impossible
to be more explicit. And we may be sure that an apologist,
writing for pagans, would weigh well the words in which he dealt
with this doctrine. Amongst polemical writers we may refer to
Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", I, xxii, IV, xx, 1-6. In these passages
he rejects the Gnostic figment that the world was created by
aeons who had emanated from God, but were not consubstantial
with Him, and teaches the consubstantiality of the Word and the
Spirit by Whom God created all things. Clement of Alexandria
professes the doctrine in "Paedag." I, vi, and somewhat later
Gregory Thaumaturgus, as we have already seen, lays it down in
the most express terms in his creed (P.G., X, 986).
(4) As contrasted with heretical teachings
Yet further evidence regarding the Church's doctrine is
furnished by a comparison of her teaching with that of heretical
sects. The controversy with the Sabellians in the third century
proves conclusively that she would tolerate no deviation from
Trinitarian doctrine. Noetus of Smyrna, the originator of the
error, was condemned by a local synod, about A.D. 200.
Sabellius, who propagated the same heresy at Rome c. A.D. 220,
was excommunicated by St. Callistus. It is notorious that the
sect made no appeal to tradition: it found Trinitarianism in
possession wherever it appeared -- at Smyrna, at Rome, in
Africa, in Egypt. On the other hand, St. Hippolytus, who combats
it in the "Contra Noetum," claims Apostolic tradition for the
doctrine of the Catholic Church: "Let us believe, beloved
brethren, in accordance with the tradition of the Apostles, that
God the Word came down from heaven to the holy Virgin Mary to
save man." Somewhat later (c. A.D. 260) Denis of Alexandria
found that the error was widespread in the Libyan Pentapolis,
and he addressed a dogmatic letter against it to two bishops,
Euphranor and Ammonius. In this, in order to emphasize the
distinction between the Persons, he termed the Son poiema tou
Theou and used other expressions capable of suggesting that the
Son is to be reckoned among creatures. He was accused of
heterodoxy to St. Dionysius of Rome, who held a council and
addressed to him a letter dealing with the true Catholic
doctrine on the point in question. The Bishop of Alexandria
replied with a defense of his orthodoxy entitled "Elegxhos kai
apologia," in whioh he corrected whatever had been erroneous. He
expressly professes his belief in the consubstantiality of the
Son, using the very term, homoousios, which afterwards became
the touchstone of orthodoxy at Nicaea (P. G., XXV, 505). The
story of the controversy is conclusive as to the doctrinal
standard of the Church. It shows us that she was firm in
rejecting on the one hand any confusion of the Persons and on
the other hand any denial of their consubstantiality.
The information we possess regarding another heresy -- that of
Montanus -- supplies us with further proof that the doctrine of
the Trinity was the Church's teaching in A.D. 150. Tertullian
affirms in the clearest terms that what he held as to the
Trinity when a Catholic he still holds as a Montanist ("Adv.
Prax.", II, 156); and in the same work he explicitly teaches the
Divinity of the Three Persons, their distinction, the eternity
of God the Son (op. cit., xxvii). Epiphanius in the same way
asserts the orthodoxy of the Montanists on this subject (Haer.,
lxviii). Now it is not to be supposed that the Montanists had
accepted any novel teaching from the Catholic Church since their
secession in the middle of the second century. Hence, inasmuch
as there was full agreement between the two bodies in regard to
the Trinity, we have here again a clear proof that
Trinitarianism was an article of faith at a time when the
Apostolic tradition was far too recent for any error to have
arisen on apoint so vital.
B. Later Controversy
Notwithstanding the force of the arguments we have just
summarised, a vigorous controversy has been carried on from the
end of the seventeenth century to the present day regarding the
Trinitarian doctrine of the ante-Nicene Fathers. The Socinian
writers of the seventeenth century (e. g. Sand, "Nucleus
historiae ecclesiastic", Amsterdam, 1668) asserted that the
language of the early Fathers in many passages of their works
shows that they agreed not with Athanasius, but with Arius.
Petavius, who was at that period engaged on his great
theological work, was convinced by their arguments, and allowed
that at least some of these Fathers had fallen into grave
errors. On the other hand, their orthodoxy was vigorously
defended by the Anglican divine Dr. George Bull ("Defensio Fidei
Nicaean", Oxford, 1685) and subsequently by Bossuet,
Thomassinus, and other Catholic theologians. Those who take the
less favourable view assert that they teach the following points
inconsistent with the post-Nicene belief of the Church:
+ That the Son even as regards His Divine Nature is inferior and
not equal to the Father;
+ that the Son alone appeared in the theophanies of the Old
Testament, inasmuchas the Father is essentially invisible, the
Son, however, not so;
+ that the Son is a created being;
+ that the generation of the Son is not eternal, but took place
in time.
We shall examine these four points in order.
(1) In proof of the assertion that many of the Fathers deny the
equality of the Son with the Father, passages are cited from
Justin (Apol., I, xiii, xxxii), Irenaeus (Adv. haer., III, viii,
n. 3), Clem. Alex. ("Strom." VII, ii), Hippolytus (Con. Noet.,
n. 14), Origen (Con. Cels., VIII, xv). Thus Irenaeus (loc. cit.)
says: "He commanded, and they were created . . . Whom did He
command? His Word, by whom, says the Scripture, the heavens were
established. And Origen, loc. cit., says: "We declare that the
Son is not mightier than the Father, but inferior to Him. And
this belief we ground on the saying of Jesus Himself: "The
Father who sent me is greater than I." Now in regard to these
passages it must be borne in mind that there are two ways of
considering the Trinity. We may view the Three Persons insofar
as they are equally possessed of the Divine Nature or we may
consider the Son and the Spirit as derivlng from the Father, Who
is the sole source of Godhead, and from Whom They receive all
They have and are. The former mode of considering them has been
the more common since the Arian heresy. The latter, however, was
more frequent previously to that period. Under this aspect, the
Father, as being: tbe sole source of all, may be termed greater
than the Son. Thus Athanasius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory
of Nyssa, and the Fathers of the Council of Sardica, in their
synodical letter, all treat our Lord's words, teaches "The
Father is greater than I" as having reference to His Godhead
(cf. Petavius, "De Trin.", II, ii, 7, vi, 11). From this point
of view it may be said that in the creation of the world the
Father commanded, the Son obeyed. The expression is not one
which would have been employed by Latin writers who insist thst
creation and all God's works proceed from Him as One and not
from the Persons as distinct from each other. But this truth was
unfamiliar to the early Fathers.
(2) Justin (Dial., n. 60) Irenaeus (Adv. haer., IV, xx, nn. 7,
11), Tertullian ("C. Marc.", II, 27; "Adv. Prax.", 15, 16),
Novatian (De Trin., xviii, 25), Theophilus (Ad Autol., II,
xxii), are accused of teaching that the theophanies were
incompatible with the essential nature of the Father, yet not
incompatible with that of the Son. In this case also the
difficulty is largely removed if it be remembered that these
writers regarded all the Divine operations as proceeding from
the Three Persons as such, and not from the Godhead viewed as
one. Now Revelation teaches us that in the work of the creation
and redemption of the world the Father effects His purpose
through the Son. Through Him He made the world; through Him He
redeemed it; through Him He will judge it. Hence it was believed
by these writers that, having regard to the present disposition
of Providence, the theophanies could only have been the work of
the Son. Moreover, in Colossians 1:15, the Son is expressly
termed "the image of the invisible God" (eikon tou Theou rou
aoratou). This expression they seem to have taken with strict
literalness. The function of an eikon is to manifest what is
itself hidden (cf. St. John Damascene, "De imagin.", III, n.
17). Hence they held that the work of revealing the Father
belongs by nature to the Second Person of the Trinity, and
concluded that the theophanies were His work.
(3) Expressions which appear to contain the statement that the
Son was created are found in Clement of Alexandria (Strom., V,
xiv; VI, vii), Tatian (Orat., v), Tertullian ("Adv. Prax." vi;
"Adv. "Adv. Hermong.", xviii, xx), Origen (In Joan., I, n. 22).
Clement speaks of Wisdom as "created before all things"
(protoktistos), and Tatian terms the Word the "first-begotten
work of (ergon prototokon) Of the Father. Yet the meaning of
these authors is clear. In Colossians 1:16, St. Paul says that
all things were created in the Son. This was understood to
signify that creation took place according to exemplar ideas
predetermined by God and existing in the Word. In view of this,
it might be said that the Father created the Word, this term
being used in place of the more accurate generated, inasmuch as
the exemplar ideas of creation were communicated by the Father
to the Son. Or, again, the actual Creation of the world might be
termed the creation of the Word, since it takes place according
to the ideas which exist in the Word. The context invariably
shows that the passage is to be understood in one or another of
these senses. The expression is undoubtedly very harsh, and it
certainly would never have been employed but for the verse,
Proverbs 8:22, which is rendered in the Septuagint and the old
Latin versions, "The Lord created (ektise) me, who am the
beginning of His ways." As the passage was understood as having
reference to the Son, it gave rise to the question how it could
be said that Wisdom was created (Origen, "Princ.", I, ii, n. 3).
It is further to be remembered that accurate terminology in
regard to the relations between the Three Persons was the fruit
of the controversies which sprang up in the fourth century. The
writers of an earlier period were not concerned with Arianism,
and employed expressions which in the light of subsequent errors
are seen to be not merely inaccurate, but dangerous. (4) Greater
difficulty is perhaps presented by a series of passages which
appear to assert that prior to the Creation of the world the
Word was not a distinct hypostasis from the Father. These are
found in Justin (C. Tryphon., lxi), Tatian (Con. Graecos, v),
Athenagoras (Legat., x), Theophilus (Ad Autol., II, x, 22);
Hippolytus (Con. Noet., x); Tertullian ("Adv. Prax.", v-vii;
"Adv. Hermogenem" xviii). Thus Theophilus writes (op. cit., n.
22): "What else is this voice [heard in Paradise] but the Word
of God Who is also His Son? . . . For before anything came into
being, He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and
thought [i.e. as the logos endiathetos, c. x]). But when God
wished to make all that He had determined on, then did He beget
Him as the uttered Word [logos prophorikos], the firstborn of
all creation, not, however, Himself being left without Reason
(logos), but having begotten Reason, and ever holding converse
with Reason." Expressions such as these are undoubtedly due to
the influence of the Stoic philosophy: the logos endiathetos and
logos prophorikos were current conceptions of that school. It is
evident that these apologists were seeking to explain the
Christian Faith to their pagan readers in terms with which the
latter were familiar. Some Catholic writers have indeed thought
that the influence of their previous training did lead some of
them into Subordinationism, although the Church herself was
never involved in the error (see Logos). Yet it does not seem
necessary to adopt this conclusion. If the point of view of the
writers be borne in mind, the expressions, strange as they are,
will be seen not to be incompatibIe with orthodox belief. The
early Fathers, as we have said, regarded Proverbs 8:22, and
Colossians 1:15, as distinctly teaching that there is a sense in
which the Word, begotten before all worlds, may rightly be said
to have been begotten also in time. This temporal generation
they conceived to be none other than the act of creation. They
viewed this as the complement of the eternal generation,
inasmuch as it is the external manifestation of those creative
ideas which from all eternity the Father has communicated to the
Eternal Word. Since, in the very same works which contain these
perplexing expressions, other passages are found teaching
explicitly the eternity of the Son, it appears most natural to
interpret them in this sense. It should further be remembered
that throughout this period theologians, when treating of the
relation of the Divine Persons to each other, invariably regard
them in connection with the cosmogony. Only later, in the Nicene
epoch, did they learn to prescind from the question of creation
and deal with the threefold Personality exclusively from the
point of view of the Divine life of the Godhead. When that stage
was reached expressions such as these became impossible.
IV. THE TRINITY AS A MYSTERY
The Vatican Council has explained the meaning to be attributed
to the term mystery in theology. It lays down that a mystery is
a truth which we are not merely incapable of discovering apart
from Divine Revelation, but which, even when revealed, remains
"hidden by the veil of faith and enveloped, so to speak, by a
kind of darkness" (Const., "De fide. cath.", iv). In other
words, our understanding of it remains only partial, even after
we have accepted it as part of the Divine messege. Through
analogies and types we can form a representative concept
expressive of what is revealed, but we cannot attain that fuller
knowledge which supposes that the various elements of the
concept are clearly grasped and their reciprocal compatibility
manifest. As regards the vindication of a mystery, the office of
the natural reason is solely to show that it contains no
intrinsic impossibility, that any objection urged against it on
Reason. "Expressions such as these are undoubtedly the score
that it violates the laws of thought is invalid. More than this
it cannot do.
The Vatican Council further defined that the Christian Faith
contains mysteries strictly so called (can. 4). All theologians
admit that the doctrine of the Trinity is of the number of
these. Indeed, of all revealed truths this is the most
impenetrable to reason. Hence, to declare this to be no mystery
would be a virtual denial of the canon in question. Moreover,
our Lord's words, Matthew 9:27, "No one knoweth the Son, but the
Father," seem to declare expressly that the plurality of Persons
in the Godhead is a truth entirely beyond the scope of any
created intellect. The Fathers supply many passages in which the
incomprehensibility of the Divine Nature is affirmed. St. Jerome
says, in a well-known phrase: "The true profession of the
mystery of the Trinity is to own that we do not comprehend it"
(De mysterio Trinitatus recta confessio est ignoratio scientiae
-- "Proem ad 1. xviii in Isai."). The controversy with the
Eunomians, who declared that the Divine Essence was fully
expressed in the absolutely simple notion of "the Innascible"
(agennetos), and that this was fully comprehensible by the human
mind, led many of the Greek Fathers to insist on the
incomprehensibility of the Divine Nature, more especially in
regard to the internal processions. St. Basil. "In Eunom.", I,
n. 14; St. Cyril of Jerusdem, "Cat.", VI; St. John Damascene,
"Fid. Orth.", I, ii, etc., etc.).
At a later date, however, some famous names are to be found
defending a contrary opinion Anselm ("Monol.", 64), Abelard ("ln
Ep. ad Rom."), Hugo of St. Victor ("De sacram." III, xi), and
Richard of St. Victor ("De Trin.", III, v) all declare that it
is possible to assign peremptory reasons why God should be both
One and Three. In explanation of this it should be noted that at
that period the relation of philosophy to revealed doctrine was
but obscurely understood. Only after the Aristotelean system had
obtained recognition from theologians was this question
thoroughly treated. In the intellectual ferment of the time
Abelard initiated a Rationalistic tendency: not merely did he
claim a knowledge of the Trinity for the pagan philosophers, but
his own Trinitarian doctrine was practically Sabellian. Anselm's
error was due not to Rationalism, but to too wide an application
of the Augustinian principle "Crede ut intelligas". Hugh and
Richard of St. Victor were, however, certainly influenced by
Abelard's teaching. Raymond Lully's (1235-1315) errors in this
regard were even more extreme. They were expressly condemned by
Gregory XI in 1376. In the nineteenth century the influence of
the prevailing Rationalism manifested itself in several Catholic
writers. Frohschammer and Guenther both asserted that the dogma
of the Trinity was capable of proof. Pius IX reprobated their
opinions on more than one occasion (Denzinger, 1655 sq., 1666
sq., 1709 sq.), and it was to guard against this tendency that
the Vatican Council issued the decrees to which reference has
been made. A somewhat similar, though less aggravated, error on
the part of Rosmini was condemned, 14 December, 1887 (Denz.,
1915).
V. THE DOCTRINE AS INTERPRETED IN GREEK THEOLOGY
A. Nature and Personality
The Greek Fathers approached the problem of Trinitarian doctrine
in a way which differs in an important particular from that
which, since the days of St. Augustine, has become traditional
in Latin theology. In Latin theology thought fixed first on the
Nature and only subsequently on the Persons. Personality is
viewed as being, so to speak, the final complement of the
Nature: the Nature is regarded as logically prior to the
Personality. Hence, because God's Nature is one, He is known to
us as One God before He can be known as Three Persons. And when
theologians speak of God without special mention of a Person,
conceive Him under this aspect. This is entirely different from
the Greek point of view. Greek thought fixed primarily on the
Three distinct Persons: the Father, to Whom, as the source and
origin of all, the name of God (Theos) more especially belongs;
the Son, proceeding from the Father by an eternal generation,
and therefore rightly termed God also; and the Divine Spirit,
proceeding from the Father through the Son. The Personality is
treated as logically prior to the Nature. Just as human nature
is something which the individual men possesses, and which can
only be conceived as belonging to and dependent on the
individual, so the Divine Nature is something which belongs to
the Persons and cannot be conceived independently of Them.
The contrast appears strikingly in regard to the question of
creation. All Western theologians teach that creation, like all
God's external works, proceeds from Him as One: the separate
Personalities do not enter into consideration. The Greeks
invariably speak as though, in all the Divine works, each Person
exercises a separate office. Irenaeus replies to the Gnostics,
who held that the world was created by a demiurge other than the
supreme God, by affirming that God is the one Creator, and that
He made all things by His Word and His Wisdom, the Son and the
Spirit (Adv. haer., I, xxii; II, iv, 4, 5, xxx, 9; IV, xx, 1). A
formula often found among the Greek Fathers is that all things
are from the Father and are effected by the Son in the Spirit
(Athanasius, "Ad Serap.", I, xxxi; Basil, "De Spiritu Sancto",
n. 38; Cyril of Alexandria, "De Trin. dial.", VI). Thus, too,
Hippolytus (Con Noet., x) says that God has fashioned all things
by His Word and His Wisdom creating them by His Word, adorning
them by His Wisdom (gar ta genomena dia Logou kai Sophias
technazetai, Logo men ktizon Sophia de kosmon). The Nicene Creed
still preserves for us this point of view. In it we still
profess our belief "in one God the Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth . . . and in one Lord Jesus Christ . . . by
Whom all things were made . . . and in the Holy Ghost."
B. The Divine Unity
The Greek Fathers did not neglect to safeguard the doctrine of
the Divine Unity, though manifestly their standpoint requires a
different treatment from that employed in the West. The
consubstantiality of the Persons is asserted by St. Irenaeus
when he tells us that God created the world by His Son and His
Spirit, "His two hands" (Adv. haer., IV, xx, 1). The purport of
the phrase is evidently to indicate that the Second and Third
Persons are not substantially distinct from the First. A more
philosophical description is the doctrine of the Recapitulation
(sygkephalaiosis). This seems to be first found in the
correspondence between St. Denis of Alexandria and St. Dionysius
of Rome. The former writes: "We thus [i.e., by the twofold
procession] extend the Monad [the First Person] to the Trinity,
without causing any division, and were capitulate the Trinity in
the Monad without causing diminution" (outo men emeis eis te ten
Triada ten Monada, platynomen adiaireton, kai ten Triada palin
ameioton eis ten Monada sygkephalaioumetha -- P.G., XXV, 504).
Here the consubstantiality is affirmed on the ground that the
Son and Spirit, proceeding from the Father, are nevertheless not
separated from Him; while they again, with all their
perfections, can be regarded as contained within Him.
This doctrine supposes a point of view very different from that
with which we are now familiar. The Greek Fathers regarded the
Son as the Wisdom and power of the Father (I Cor., 1:24) in a
formal sense, and in like manner, the Spirit as His Sanctity.
Apart from the Son the Father would be without Hls Wisdom; apart
from the Spirit He would be without His Sanctity. Thus the Son
and the Spirit are termed "Powers" (Dynameis) of the Father. But
while in creatures the powers and faculties are mere accidental
perfections, in the Godhead they are subsistent hypostases.
Denis of Alexandria regarding the Second and Third Persons as
the Father's "Powers", speaks of the First Person as being
"extended" to them, and not divided from them. And, since
whatever they have and are flows from Him, this writer asserts
that if we fix our thoughts on the sole source of Deity alone,
we find in Him undiminished all that is contained in them.
The Arian controversy led to insistence on the Homouesia. But
with the Greeks this is not a starting point, but a conclusion,
the result of reflective analysis. The sonship of the Second
Person implies that He has received the Divine Nature in its
fullness, for all generation implies the origination of one who
is like in nature to the originating principle. But here, mere
specific unity is out of the question. The Divine Essence is not
capable of numerical multiplication; it is therefore, they
reasoned, identically the same nature which both possess. A
similar line of argument establishes that the Divine Nature as
communicated to the Holy Spirit is not specifically, but
numerically, one with that of the Father and the Son. Unity of
nature was understood by the Greek Fathers as involving unity of
will and unity of action (energeia). This they declared the
Three Persons to possess (Athanasius, "Adv. Sabell.", xii, 13;
Basil, "Ep. clxxxix," n. 7; Gregory of Nyssa, "De orat. dom.,"
John Damascene, "De fide orth.", III, xiv). Here we see an
important advance in the theology of the Godhead. For, as we
have noted, the earlier Fathers invariably conceive the Three
Persons as each exercising a distinct and separate function.
Finally we have the doctrine of Circuminsession (perichoresis).
By this is signified the reciprocal inexistence and
compenetration of the Three Persons. The term perichoresis is
first used by St. John Damascene. Yet the doctrine is found much
earlier. Thus St. Cyril of Alexandria says that the Son is
called the Word and Wisdom of the Father "because of the
reciprocal inherence of these and the mind" (dia ten eis allela
. . . ., hos an eipoi tis, antembolen). St. John Damascene
assigns a twofold basis for this inexistence of the Persons. In
some passages he explains it by the doctrine already mentioned,
that the Son and the Spirit are dynameis of the Father (cf. "De
recta sententia"). Thus understood, the Circuminsession is a
corollary of the doctrine of Recapitulation. He also understands
it as signifying the identity of essence, will, and action in
the Persons. Wherever these are peculiar to the individual, as
is the case in all creatures, there, he tells us, we have
separate existence (kechorismenos einai). In the Godhead the
essence, will, and action are but one. Hence we have not
separate existence, but Circuminsession (perichoresis) (Fid.
orth., I, viii). Here, then, the Circuminsession has its basis
in the Homouesia.
It is easy to see that the Greek system was less well adapted to
meet the cavils of the Arian and Macedonian heretics than was
that subsequently developedby St. Augustine. Indeed the
controversies of the fourth century brought some of the Greek
Fathers notably nearer to the positions of Latin theology. We
have seen that they were led to affirm the action of the Three
Persons to be but one. Didymus even employs expressions which
seem to show that he, like the Latins, conceived the Nature as
logically antecedent to the Persons. He understands the term God
as signifying the whole Trinity, and not, as do the other
Greeks, the Father alone: "When we pray, whether we say 'Kyrie
eleison', or 'O God aid us', we do not miss our mark: for we
include the whole of the Blessed Trinity in one Godhead" (De
Trin., II, xix).
C. Mediate and Immediate Procession
The doctrine that the Spirit is the image of the Son, as the Son
is the image of the Father, is characteristic of Greek theology.
It is asserted by St. Gregory Thaumaturgus in his Creed. It is
assumed by St. Athanasius as an indisputable premise in his
controversy with the Macedonians (Ad Serap., I, xx, xxi, xxiv;
II, i, iv). It is implied in the comparisons employed both by
him (Ad Serap. I, xix) and by St. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. xxxi,
31, 32), of the Three Divine Persons to the sun, the ray, the
light; and to the source, the spring, and the stream. We find it
also in St. Cyril of Alexandria ("Thesaurus assert.", 33), St.
John Damascene ("Fid.orth." I, 13), etc. This supposes that the
procession of the Son from the Father is immediate; that of the
Spirit from the Father is mediate. He proceeds from the Father
through the Son. Bessarion rightly observes that the Fathers who
used these expressions conceived the Divine Procession as taking
place, so to speak, along a straight line (P. G., CLXI, 224). On
the other hand, in Western theology the symbolic diagram of the
Trinity has ever been the triangle, the relations of the Three
Persons one to another being precisely similar. The point is
worth noting, for this diversity of symbolic representation
leads inevitably to very different expressions of the same
dogmatic truth. It is plain that these Fathers would have
rejected no less firmly than the Latins the later Photian heresy
that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone. (For this
question the reader is referred to Holy Ghost.)
D. The Son
The Greek theology of the Divine Generation differs in certain
particulars from the Latin. Most Western theologians base their
theory on the name, Logos, given by St. John to the Second
Person. This they understand in the sense of "concept" (verbum
mentale), and hold that the Divine Generation is analogous to
the act by which the created intellect produces its concept.
Among Greek writers this explanation is unknown. They declare
the manner of the Divine Generation to be altogether beyond our
comprehension. We know by revelation that God has a Son; and
various other terms besides Son employed regarding Him in
Scripture, such as Word, Brightness of His glory, etc., show us
that His sonship must be conceived as free from any relation.
More we know not (cf. Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxix", p. 8,
Cyril of Jerusalem, "Cat.", xi, 19; John Damascene, "Fid.
orth.", I, viii). One explanation only can be given, namely,
that the perfection we call fecundity must needs be found in God
the Absolutely Perfect (St. John Damascene, "Fid.orth.", I,
viii). Indeed it would seem that the great majority of the Greek
Fathers understood logos not of the mental thought; but of the
uttered word ("Dion. Alex."; Athanasius, ibid.; Cyril of
Alexandria, "De Trin.", II). They did not see in the term a
revelation that the Son is begotten by way of intellectual
procession, but viewed it as a metaphor intended to exclude the
material associations of human sonship (Gregory of Nyssa, "C.
Eunom.", IV; Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxx", p. 20; Basil, "Hom.
xvi"; Cyril of Alexandria, "Thesaurus assert.", vi).
We have already adverted to the view that the Son is the Wisdom
and Power of the Father in the full and formal sense. This
teaching constantly recurs from the time of Origen to that of
St. John Damascene (Origen apud Athan., "De decr. Nic.", p. 27;
Athanasius, "Con. Arianos", I, p. 19; Cyril of Alexandria,
"Thesaurus"; John Damascene, "Fid.orth.", I, xii). It is based
on the Platonic philosophy accepted by the Alexandrine School.
This differs in a fundamental point from the Aristoteleanism of
the Scholastic theologians. In Aristotelean philosophy
perfection is always conceived statically. No actlon, transient
or immanent, can proceed from any agent unless that agent, as
statically conceived, possesses whatever perfection is contained
in the action. The Alexandrine standpoint was other than this.
To them perfection must be sought in dynamic activity. God, as
the supreme perfection, is from all eternity self-moving, ever
adorning Himself with His own attributes: they issue from Him
and, being Divine, are not accidents, but subsistent realities.
To these thinkers, therefore, there was no impossibility in the
supposition that God is wise with the Wisdom which is the result
of His own immanent action, powerful with the Power which
proceeds from Him. The arguments of the Greek Fathers frequently
presuppose this philosophy as their bssis; and unless it be
clearly grasped, reasoning which on their premises is conclusive
will appear to us invalid and fallacious. Thus it is sometimes
urged as a reason for rejecting Arianism that, if there were a
time when the Son was not, it follows that God must then have
been devoid of Wisdom and of Power -- a conclusion from which
even Arians would shrink.
E. The Holy Spirit
A point which in Western theology gives occasion for some
discussion is the question as to why the Third Person of the
Blessed Trinity is termed the Holy Spirit. St. Augustine
suggests that it is because He proceeds from both the Father and
the Son, and hence He rightly receives a name applicable to both
(De Trin., xv, n. 37). To the Greek Fathers, who developed the
theology of the Spirit in the light of the philosophical
principles which we have just noticed, the question presented no
difficulty. His name, they held, reveals to us His distinctive
character as the Third Person, just as the names Father and Son
manifest the distinctive characters of the First and Second
Persons (cf. Gregory Thaumaturgus, "Ecth. fid."; Basil, "Ep.
ccxiv", 4; Gregory Nazianzen, "Or. xxv", 16). He is autoagiotes,
the hypostatic holiness of God, the holiness by which God is
holy. Just as the Son is the Wisdom and Power by which God is
wise and powerful, so the Spirit is the Holiness by which He is
holy. Had there ever been a time, as the Macedonians dared to
say, when the Holy Spirit was not, then at that time God would
have not been holy (St. Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxxi", 4).
On the other hand, pneuma was often understood in the light of
John 10:22 where Christ, appearing to the Apostles, breathed on
them and conferred on them the Holy Spirit. He is the breath of
Christ (John Damascene, "Fid. orth.", 1, viii), breathed by Him
into us, and dwelling in us as the breath of life by which we
enjoy the supernatural life of God's children (Cyril of
Alexandria, "Thesaurus"; cf. Petav., "De Trin", V, viii). The
office of the Holy Spirit in thus elevating us to the
supernatural order is, however, conceived in a manner somewhat
different from that of Western theologians. According to Western
doctrine, God bestows on man sanctifying grace, and consequent
on that gift the Three Persons come to his soul. In Greek
theology the order is reversed: the Holy Spirit does not come to
us because we have received sanctifying grace; but it is through
His presence we receive the gift. He is the seal, Himself
impressing on us the Divine image. That Divine image is indeed
realized in us, but the seal must be present to secure the
continued existence of the impression. Apart from Him it is not
found (Origen, "In Joan. ii", vi; Didymus, "De Spiritu Sancto",
x, 11; Athanasius, "Ep. ad. Serap.", III, iii). This Union with
the Holy Spirit constitutes our deification (theopoiesis).
Inasmuch as He is the image of Christ, He imprints the likeness
of Christ upon us; since Christ is the image of the Father, we
too receive the true character of God's children (Athanasius,
loc.cit.; Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxxi", 4). It is in
reference to this work in our regard that in the
Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed the Holy Spirit is termed the
Giver of life (zoopoios). In the West we more naturally speak of
grace as the life of the soul. But to the Greeks it was the
Spirit through whose personal presence we live. Just as God gave
natural life to Adam by breathing into his inanimate frame the
breath of life, so did Christ give spiritual life to us when He
bestowed on us the gift of the Holy Ghost.
VI. THE DOCTRINE AS INTERPRETED IN LATIN THEOLOGY
The transition to the Latin theology of the Trinity was the work
of St. Augustine. Western theologians have never departed from
the main lines which he laid down, although in the Golden Age of
Scholasticism his system was developed, its details completed,
and its terminology perfected. It received its final and
classical form from St. Thomas Aquinas. But it is necessary
first to indicate in what consisted the transition effected by
St. Augustine. This may be summed up in three points:
+ He views the Divine Nature as prior to the Personalities. Deus
is for him not God the Father, but the Trinity. This was a
step of the first importance, safeguarding as it did alike the
unity of God and the equality of the Persons in a manner which
the Greek system could never do. As we have seen, one at least
of the Greeks, Didymus, had adopted this standpoint and it is
possible that Augustine may have derived this method of
viewing the mystery from him. But to make it the basis for the
whole treatment of the doctrine was the work of Augustine's
genius.
+ He insists that every external operation God is due to the
whole Trinity, and cannot be attributed to one Person alone,
save by appropriation (see Holy Ghost). The Greek Fathers had,
as we have seen, been led to affirm that the action (energeia)
of the Three Persons was one, and one alone. But the doctrine
of appropriation was unknown to them, and thus the value of
this conclusion was obscured by a traditional theology
implying the distinct activities of Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit.
+ By indicating the analogy between the two processions within
the Godhead and the internal acts of thought and will in the
human mind (De Trin., IX, iii, 3; X, xi, 17), he became the
founder of the psychological theory of the Trinity, which,
with a very few exceptions, was accepted by every subsequent
Latin writer.
In the following exposition of the Latin doctrines, we shall
follow St. Thomas Aquinas, whose treatment of the doctrine is
now universally accepted by Catholic theologians. It should be
observed, however, that this is not the only form in which the
psychological theory has been proposed. Thus Richard of St.
Victor, Alexander of Hales, and St. Bonaventure, while adhering
in the main to Western tradition, were more influenced by Greek
thought, and give us a system differing somewhat from that of
St. Thomas.
A. The Son
Among the terms empIoyed in Scripture to designate the Second
Person of the Blessed Trinity is the Word (John 1:1). This is
understood by St. Thomas of the Verbum mentale, or intellectual
concept. As applied to the Son, the name, he holds, signifies
that He proceeds from the Father as the term of an intellectual
procession, in a manner analogous to that in which a concept is
generated by the human mind in all acts of natural knowledge. It
is, indeed, of faith that the Son proceeds from the Father by a
veritable generation. He is, says the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan
Creed, begotten before all worlds". But the Procession of a
Divine Person as the term of the act by which God knows His own
nature is rightly called generation. This may be readily shown.
As an act of intellectual conception, it necessarily produces
the likeness of the object known. And further, being Divine
action, it is not an accidental act resulting in a term, itself
a mere accident, but the act is the very substance of the
Divinity, and the term is likewise substantial. A process
tending necessarily to the production of a substantial term like
in nature to the Person from Whom it proceeds is a process of
generation. In regard to this view as to the procession of the
Son, a difficulty was felt by St. Anselm (Monol., lxiv) on the
score that it would seem to involve that each of the Three
Persons must needs generate a subsistent Word. Since all the
Powers possess the same mind, does it not follow, he asked, that
in each case thought produces a similar term? This difficulty
St. Thomas succeeds in removing. According to his psychology the
formation of a concept is not essential to thought as such,
though absolutely requisite to all natural human knowledge.
There is, therefore, no ground in reason, apart from revelation,
for holding that the Divine intellect produces a Verbum mentale.
It is the testimony of Scripture alone which tells us that the
Father has from all eternity begotten His consubstantial Word.
But neither reason nor revelation suggests it in the case of the
Second and Third Persons (I:34:1, ad 3).
Not a few writers of great weight hold that there is sufficient
consensus among the Fathers and Scholastic theologians as to the
meaning of the names Word and Wisdom (Proverbs 8), applied to
the Son, for us to regard the intellectual procession of the
Second Person as at least theologically certain, if not a
revealed truth (cf. Suarez, "De Trin.", I, v, p. 4; Petav., VI,
i, 7; Franzelin, "De Trin.", Thesis xxvi). This, however, seems
to be an exaggeration. The immense majority of the Greek
Fathers, as we have already noticed, interpret logos of the
spoken word, and consider the significance of the name to lie
not in any teaching as to intellectual procession, but in the
fact that it implies a mode of generation devoid of all passion.
Nor is the tradition as to the interpretation of Proverbs 8, in
any sense unanimous. In view of these facts the opinion of those
theologians seems the sounder who regard this explanation of the
procession simply as a theological opinion of great probability
and harmonizing well with revealed truth.
B. The Holy Spirit
Just as the Son proceeds as the term of the immanent act of the
intellect, so does the Holy Spirit proceed as the term of the
act of the Divine will. In human love, as St. Thomas teaches
(I:27:3), even though the object be external to us, yet the
immanent act of love arouses in the soul a state of ardour which
is, as it were, an impression of the thing loved. In virtue of
this the object of love is present to our affections, much as,
by means of the concept, the object of thought is present to our
intellect. This experience is the term of the internal act. The
Holy Spirit, it is contended, proceeds from the Father and the
Son as the term of the love by which God loves Himself. He is
not the love of God in the sense of being Himself formally the
love by which God loves; but in loving Himself God breathes
forth this subsistent term. He is Hypostatic Love. Here,
however, it is necessary to safeguard a point of revealed
doctrine. It is of faith that the procession of the Holy Spirit
is not generation. The Son is "the only begotten of the Father"
(John 1:14). And the Athanasian Creed expressly lays it down
that the Holy Ghost is "from the Father and the Son, neither
made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding." If the
immanent act of the intellect is rightly termed generation, on
what grounds can that name be denied to the act of the will? The
answers given in reply to this difficulty by St. Thomas, Richard
of St. Victor, and Alexander of Hales are very different. It
will be sufficient here to note St. Thomas's solution.
Intellectual procession, he says, is of its very nature the
production of a term in the likeness of the thing conceived.
This is not so in regard to the act of the will. Here the
primary result is simply to attract the subject to the object of
his love. This difference in the acts explains why the name
generation is applicable only to the act of the intellect.
Generation is essentially the production of like by like. And no
process which is not essentially of that character can claim the
name.
The doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit by means of
the act of the Divine will is due entirely to Augustine. It is
nowhere found among the Greeks, who simply declare the
procession of the Spirit to be beyond our comprehension, nor is
it found in the Latins before his time. He mentions the opinion
with favour in the "De fide et symbolo" (A.D. 393); and in the
"De Trinitate" (A.D. 415) develops it at length. His teaching
was accepted by the West. The Scholastics seek for Scriptural
support for it in the name Holy Spirit. This must, they argue,
be, like the names Father and Son, a name expressive of a
relation within the Godhead proper to the Person who bears it.
Now the attribute holy, as applied to person or thing, signifies
that the being of which it is affirmed is devoted to God. It
follows therefore that, when applied to a Divine Person as
designating the relation uniting Him to the other Persons, it
must signify that the procession determining His origin is one
which of its nature involves devotion to God. But that by which
any person is devoted to God is love. The argument is ingenious,
but hardly convincing; and the same may be said of a somewhat
similar piece of reasoning regarding the name Spirit (I:36:1).
The Latin theory is a noble effort of the human reason to
penetrate the verities which revelation has left veiled in
mystery. It harmonizes, as we have said, with all the truths of
faith. It is admirably adapted to assist us to a fuller
comprehension of the fundamental doctrine of the Christian
religion. But more than this must not be claimed. It does not
possess the sanction of revelation.
C. The Divine Relations
The existence of relations in the Godhead may be immediately
inferred from the doctrine of processions, and as such is a
truth of Revelation. Where there is a real procession the
principle and the term are really related. Hence, both the
generation of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit must
involve the existence of real and objective relations. This part
of Trinitarian doctrine was familiar to the Greek Fathers. In
answer to the Eunomian objection, that consubstantiality
rendered any distinction between the Persons impossible, Gregory
of Nyssa replies: "Though we hold that the nature [in the Three
Persons] is not different, we do not deny the difference arising
in regard of the source and that which proceeds from the source
[ten katato aition kai to aitiaton diaphoran]; but in this alone
do we admit that one Person differs from another" ("Quod non
sunt tres dii"; cf. Gregory Nazianzen, "Or. theol.", V, ix; John
Damascene, "F.O.", I, viii). Augustine insists that of the ten
Aristotelean categories two, stance and relation, are found in
God ("De Trin.", V, v). But it was at the hands the Scholastic
theologians that the question received its full development. The
results to which they led, though not to be reckoned as part of
the dogma, were found to throw great light upon the mystery, and
to be of vast service in the objections urged against it.
From the fact that there are two processions in Godhead, each
involving both a principle and term, it follows that there must
be four relations, two origination (paternitas and spiratio) and
two of procession (filiatio and processio). These relations are
what constitute the distinction between the Persons. They cannot
be digtinguished by any absolute attribute, for every absolute
attribute must belong to the infinite Divine Nature and this is
common to the Three Persons. Whatever distinction there is must
be in the relations alone. This conclusion is held as absolutely
certain by all theologians. Equivalently contained in the words
of St. Gregory of Nyssa, it was clearly enunciated by St. Anselm
("De process. Sp. S.", ii) and received ecclesiastical sanction
in the "Decretum pro Jacobitis" in the form: "[In divinis] omnia
sunt unum ubi non obviat relationis oppositio." Since this is
so, it is manifest that the four relations suppose but Three
Persons. For there is no relative opposition between spiration
on the one hand and either paternity or filiation on the other.
Hence the attribute of spiration is found in conjunction with
each of these, and in virtue of it they are each distinguished
from procession. As they share one and the same Divine Nature,
so they possess the same virtus spirationis, and thus constitute
a single originating principle of the Holy Spirit.
Inasmuch as the relations, and they alone, are distinct
realities in the Godhead, it follows that the Divine Persons are
none other than these relations. The Father is the Divine
Paternity, the Son the Divine Filiation, the Holy Spirit the
Divine Procession. Here it must be borne in mind that the
relations are not mere accidental determinations as these
abstract terms might suggest. Whatever is in God must needs be
subsistent. He is the Supreme Substance, transcending the
divisions of the Aristotelean categories. Hence, at one and the
same time He is both substance and relation. (How it is that
there should be in God real relations, though it is altogether
impossible that quantity or quality should be found in Him, is a
question involving a discussion regarding the metaphysics of
relations, which would be out of place in an article such as the
present.)
It will be seen that the doctrine of the Divine relations
provides an answer to the objection that the dogma of the
Trinity involves the falsity of the axiom that things which are
identical with the same thing are identical one with another. We
reply that the axiom is perfectly true in regard to absolute
entities, to which alone it refers. But in the dogma of the
Trinity when we affirm that the Father and Son are alike
identical with the Divine Essence, we are affirming that the
Supreme Infinite Substance is identical not with two absolute
entities, but with each of two relations. These relations, in
virtue of their nature as correlatives, are necessarily opposed
the one to the other and therefore different. Again it is said
that if there are Three Persons in the Godhead none can be
infinite, for each must lack something which the others possess.
We reply that a relation, viewed precisely as such, is not, like
quantity or quality, an intrinsic perfection. When we affirm
again it is relation of anything, we affirm that it regards
something other than itself. The whole perfection of the Godhead
is contained in the one infinite Divine Essence. The Father is
that Essence as it eternally regards the Son and the Spirit; the
Son is that Essence as it eternally regards the Father and the
Spirit; the Holy Spirit is that Essence as it eternally regards
the Father and the Son. But the eternal regard by which each of
the Three Persons is constituted is not an addition to the
infinite perfection of the Godhead.
The theory of relations also indicates the solution to the
difficulty now most frequently proposed by anti-Trinitarians. It
is urged that since there are Three Persons there must be three
self-consciousnesses: but the Divine mind ex hypothesi is one,
and therefore can possess but one self-consciousness; in other
words, the dogma contains an irreconcilable contradiction. This
whole objection rests on a petitio principii: for it takes for
granted the identification of person and of mind with
self-consciousness. This identification is rejected by Catholic
philosophers as altogether misleading. Neither person nor mind
is self-consciousness; though a person must needs possess
self-consciousness, and consciousness attests the existence of
mind (see Personality). Granted that in the infinite mind, in
which the categories are transcended, there are three relations
which are subsistent realities, distinguished one from another
in virtue of their relative opposition then it will follow that
the same mind will have a three-fold consciousness, knowing
itself in three ways in accordance with its three modes of
existence. It is impossible to establish that, in regard of the
infinite mind, such a supposition involves a contradiction.
The question was raised by the Scholastics: In what sense are we
to understand the Divine act of generation? As we conceive
things, the relations of paternity and filiation are due to an
act by which the Father generates the Son; the relations of
spiration and procession, to an act by which Father and Son
breathe forth the Holy Spirit. St. Thomas replies that the acts
are identical with the relations of generation and spiration;
only the mode of expression on our part is different (I:41:3, ad
2). This is due to the fact that the forms alike of our thought
and our language are moulded upon the material world in which we
live. In this world origination is in every case due to the
effecting of a change. We call the effecting of the change
action, and its reception passion. Thus, action and passion are
different from the permanent relations consequent on them. But
in the Godhead origination is eternal: it is not the result of
change. Hence the term signifying action denotes not the
production of the relation, but purely the relation of the
Originator to the Originated. The terminology is unavoidable
because the limitations of our experience force us to represent
this relation as due to an act. Indeed throughout this whole
subject we are hampered by the imperfection of human language as
an instrument wherewith to express verities higher than the
facts of the world. When, for instance, we say that the Son
possesses filiation and spiration the terms seem to suggest that
these are forms inherent in Him as in a subject. We know,
indeed, that in the Divine Persons there can be no composition:
they are absolutely simple. Yet we are forced to speak thus: for
the one Personality, not withstanding its simplicity, is related
to both the others, and by different relations. We cannot
express this save by attributing to Him filiation and spiration
(I:32:2).
D. Divine Mission
It has been seen that every action of God in regard of the
created world proceeds from the Three Persons indifferently. In
what sense, then, are we to understand such texts as "God sent .
. . his Son into the world" (John 3:17), and "the Paraclete
cometh, whom I will send you from the Father" (John 15:26)? What
is meant by the mission of the Son and of the Holy Spirit? To
this it is answered that mission supposes two conditions:
+ That the person sent should in some way proceed from the
sender and
+ that the person sent should come to be at the place indicated.
The procession, however, may take place in various ways -- by
command, or counsel, or even origination. Thus we say that a
king sends a messenger, and that a tree sends forth buds. The
second condition, too, is satisfied either if the person sent
comes to be somewhere where previously he was not, or if,
although he was already there, he comes to be there in a new
manner. Though God the Son was already present in the world by
reason of His Godhead, His Incarnation made Him present there in
a new way. In virtue of this new presence and of His procession
from the Father, He is rightly said to have been sent into the
world. So, too, in regard to the mission of the Holy Spirit. The
gift of grace renders the Blessed Trinity present to the soul in
a new manner: that is, as the object of direct, though
inchoative, knowledge and as the object of experimental love. By
reason of this new mode of presence common to the whole Trinity,
the Second and the Third Persons, inasmuch as each receives the
Divine Nature by means of a procession, may be said to be sent
into the soul. (See also Holy Ghost; Logos; Monotheists;
Unitarians.)
Among the numerous patristic works on this subject, the
following call for special mention: ST. ATHANASIUS, Orationes
quatuor contra Arianos; IDEM, Liber de Trinitate et Spiritu
Sancto; ST. GREGORY NAZIANZEN, Orationes V de theologia; DIDYMUS
ALEX., Libri III de Trinitate; IDEM, Liber de Spir. Sancto; ST.
HILARY OF POITIERS, Libri XII de Trinitate; ST. AUGUSTINE, Libri
XV de Trinitate; ST. JOHN DAMASCENE, Liber de Trinitate; IDEM,
De fide orthodoxa, I.
Among the medieval theologians: ST. ANSELM, Lib. I. de fide
Trinitatis; RICHARD OF ST. VICTOR, Libri VI de Trinitate;
ST.THOMAS, Summa, I, xxvii-xliii; BESSARION, Liber de Spiritu
Saneto contra Marcum Ephesinum.
Among more recent writers: PETAVIUS, De Trinitate; NEWMAN.
Causes of the Rise and Success of Arianism in Theol. Tracts.
(London, 1864).
G. H. JOYCE
Trinity College
Trinity College
An institution for the higher education of Catholic women,
located at Washington, D.C., and empowered under the terms of
its charter (1897) to confer degrees. The college originated in
the desire of the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur, who had been
thirty-five years established in the city of Washington, to open
a select day-school in the suburb of Brookland. Before
requesting the necessary ecclesiastical sanction, it was
proposed to them by the authorities of the Catholic University
to make the new school a college equal in efficiency to the
women's colleges already established in the United States.
Cardinal Gibbons, chancellor of the university, heartily endorse
this project, "persuaded", he wrote, "that such and institution,
working in union with, though entirely independent of, the
Catholic University, will do incalculable good in the cause of
higher education" (5 April 1897). Sister Julia, then provincial
superior of the Sisters of Notre Dame, secured a tract of
thirty-three acres lying between Michigan and Lincoln Avenues,
Brookland. The corner-stone was laid on 8 December, 1899; the
South Hall of the building was dedicated by Cardinal Gibbons, on
22 November 1900, and the structure was completed in 1910. It
contains residence halls for two hundred students, lecture
rooms, laboratories, a museum, a library of 12,000 volumes, and
a temporary chapel. The O'Connor Art Gallery and Auditorium, a
hall provided by the generosity of Judge and Mrs. M.P. O'Connor
of San Jose, California, houses a large and valuable collection
of paintings, water colours, mosaics, photographs, and statuary,
which was opened to visitors on 31 May, 1904, in the presence of
the donors. The Holahan Social Hall contains some rare old
paintings, a bequest to the college in 1907 by Miss Amanda
Holahan of Philadelphia. The administration of the college is in
the hands of an advisory board, of which Cardinal Gibbons is
president, and the members comprise the rector, and vice-rector
of the Catholic University, the provincial superior of the
Sisters of Notre Dame, the president of the college, who is also
the superior of the community, and the president of the
auxiliary board of regents. The auxiliary board of regents and
its associate boards draw their members from all parts of the
United States, being composed of Catholic ladies who can help
the cause of higher education by their influence and example.
The college has no endowment. By the liberality of friends,
seventeen scholarships have been established. The faculty of
Trinity College is composed of six professors from the Catholic
University in the departments of philosophy, education,
apologetics, economics, and sociology, and seventeen Sisters of
Notre Name in the departments of religion, Sacred Scripture,
ancient and modern languages, English, history, logic,
mathematics, the physical sciences, music, and art. The college
opened its courses on 7 November 1900, with twenty-two students
in the Freshman class and has grown only by promotion and
admission. For 1911-1912, 160 were registered. Admission is by
examination according to the requirements of the College
Entrance Examination Board; no specialists are received; and
there is no preparatory department. The number of degrees
conferred (1904-1912) is 160, viz.: master of arts, 8; bachelor
of arts, 130; bachelor of letters, 20; bachelor of science, 2.
Annals of Trinity College (Washington, D.C.); SISTER OF NOTRE
DAME, The Life of Sister Julia, Provincial Superior of the
Sisters of Notre Dame (Washington, D.C., 1911); MCDEVITT,
Trinity College and the Higher Education in The Catholic World
(June, 1904); HOWE, Trinity College in Donahoe's Magazine
(October, 1900).
SISTER OF NOTRE DAME
Trinity Sunday
Trinity Sunday
The first Sunday after Pentecost, instituted to honour the Most
Holy Trinity. In the early Church no special Office or day was
assigned for the Holy Trinity. When the Arian heresy was
spreading the Fathers prepared an Office with canticles,
responses, a Preface, and hymns, to be recited on Sundays. In
the Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great (P.L., LXXVIII, 116)
there are prayers and the Preface of the Trinity. The
Micrologies (P.L., CLI, 1020), written during the pontificate of
Gregory VII (Nilles, II, 460), call the Sunda after Pentecost a
Dominica vacans, with no special Office, but add that in some
places they recited the Office of the Holy Trinity composed by
Bishop Stephen or Liege (903-20) By other the Office was said on
the Sunday before Advent. Alexander II (1061-1073), not III
(Nilles, 1. c.), refused a petition for a special feast on the
plea, that such a feast was not customary in the Roman Church
which daily honoured the Holy Trinity by the Gloria, Patri,
etc., but he did not forbid the celebration where it already
existed. John XXII (1316-1334) ordered the feast for the entire
Church on the first Sunday after Pentecost. A new Office had
been made by the Franciscan John Peckham, Canon of Lyons, later
Archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1292). The feast ranked as a double
of the second class but was raised to the dignity of a primary
of the first class, 24 July 1911, by Pius X (Acta Ap. Sedis,
III, 351). The Greeks have no special feast. Since it was after
the first great Pentecost that the doctrine of the Trinity was
proclaimed to the world, the feast becomingly follows that of
Pentecost.
NILLES, Kal. man. (Innsbruck, 1897); BINTERIM, Denkwuerdig
keiten, I. 264; KELLNER, Heortology (London, 1908). 116;
BAeUMER, Geschichte des Breviers (Freiburg, 1895), 298.
FRANCIS MERSHMAN
Triple-Candlestick
Triple-Candlestick
A name given along with several others (e.g. reed, tricereo,
arundo, triangulum, lumen Christi) to a church ornament used
only in the office of Holy Saturday. The three candles of which
it is composed are successively lighted, as the sacred ministers
proceed up the church, from the fire consecrated in the porch,
and at each lighting the deacon sings the acclamation "Lumen
Christi", the assistants genuflecting and answering "Deo
gratias". As this ceremony is fully discussed under the heading
Lumen Christi (and cf. Liturgical Use of Fire) it will be
sufficient to say a word here about the material instrument used
for the purpose. Both the rubrics of the Missal and the
"Caeremoniale Episcoporum" seem to assume that the so-called
triple candlestick is not a permanent piece of furniture, but
merely an arrangement of three candles temporarily attached to a
reed or wand, such a reed for example as is used by the acolytes
to light the candles with. "Praeparetur arundo cum tribus
candelis in summitate positis" (Caer. Epis., II, xxvii, I). In
practice, however, we often find a brass candlestick constructed
for the purpose with a long handle. Barbier de Montault (Traite
pratique, ete.,II,311) infers from the wording of the Missal
rubric (arundo cum tribus candelis in summitate illius triangulo
distinctis) that one of the three candles should stand higher
than the other, so that the three flames may form a triangle in
the vertical plane. A triple and double candlestick are used by
bishops of the Greek Church to bless the people with, and an
elaborate symbolism is attached to this rite.
Thurston, Lent and Holy Week (London, 1904).
HERBERT THURSTON
Tripolis
Tripolis
(Tripolitana).
A Maronite and Melchite diocese, in Syria. The primitive name of
the town is not known; Dhorme (Revue biblique, 1908, 508 sqq.)
suggests that it is identical witrh Shi-ga-ta mentioned in the
El-Amarna letters between 1385 and 1368 B.C. The name Tripolis
is derived from the fact that the city formed three districts
separated from each other by walls, inhabited by colonists from
Aradus, Tyre, and Sidon, and governed by a common senate. Almost
nothing is known of its ancient history. Christianity was
introduced there at an early date; mention may be made of a much
frequented sanctuary there which was dedicated to the martyr St.
Leontius, whose feast is observed on 18 June (Analecta
bollandiana, XIX, 9-12). The see, which was in the Province of
Tyre and the Patriarchate of Antioch, had a bishop, Helladicus,
in 325; other bishops were: the Arian Theodosius; Commodus, who
was present at the Council of Ephesus in 431; and Theodorus, at
that of Chalcedon in 451 (Le Quien, "Oriens christ.", II,
821-24). After an earthquake Tripolis was restored by Emperor
Marcianus about the middle of the fifth century, to be captured
by the Arabs in 638, when it became a powerful centre of the
Shiite religion, resisting all attacks by the Byzantines. It
then had a university and a library of more than 100,000
volumes; the latter was burned on the arrival of the Crusaders.
As early as 1103 Raymond, Count of Saint-Gilles, being unable to
capture the city, built on a neighbouring hill the stronghold
which still exists and compelled the inhabitants to pay him
tribute. In 1109 the city was captured, made a countship, and
given to Bertrand, Raymond's son, and to his descendants. The
latter owned it until 1289, when it was taken from them by
Sultan Qalaoun, who massacred the entire Christian population.
Du Cange (Les familles d'outre-mer, 811-13) and Eubel
(Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, I, 526: II, 281; III, 339)
give the list of its Latin residential and titular bishops. In
1517 the Turks finally captured Tripoli and still retain
possession of it. In 1697 the Maronite prince Younes was
martyred there for the Faith, and in 1711 the Sheikh
Canaan-Daher-Shhedid.
Tripolis is now a sanjak of the vilayet of Beirut, and contains
two towns linked by a tramway: El-Mina, or maritime Tripolis, on
the site of the ancient city, and Taraboulos, built since 1289,
at the foot of Raymond's fortress. The two cities together
contain 37,000 inhabitants, of whom 110 are Latins, 2200
Oriental Catholics of various rites, and 4000 schismatic
Melchites; the remainder are Mussulmans. The Maronite bishop,
Mgr. Antoine Arida, consecrated on 18 June, 1908, resides at
Karrusadde. The Melchite bishop, Mgr. Joseph Doumani, was
consecrated on 21 March, 1897. The Franciscans have the Latin
parish and two establishments. In this parish are also
established the Lazarists, the Carmelites, the Brothers of the
Christian Schools, and the Sisters of Charity. The sanctuary of
the Blessed Virgin is called Saidyat el-Harah, Our Lady of the
Quarter. The Maronite diocese has 48,000 faithful, 350 priests,
and 70 churches. The Melchite diocese, created in 1897, has 1225
faithful, 14 priests, 10 churches or chapels, and 6 schools. The
schismatic Melchite diocese has 50,000 members.
DU CANGE, Les familles d'outre-mer (Paris, 1869), 477-95; RENAN,
Mission de PhEnicie (Paris, 1864), 120-30; GUERIN, Description
de la Palestine: Galilee, II, 23-30; GOUDARD, La Sainte Vierge
au Liban, 269-77; Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907), 783, 819;
CHARON in Annuaire pont. cath. (Paris, 1911), 430.
S. VAILHE
Giangiorgio Trissino
Giangiorgio Trissino
Italian poet and scholar, b. of a patrician family at Vicenza in
1478; d. at Rome, 8 December, 1550. He had the advantages of a
good humanistic training, studying Greek under the noted
Demetrius Chalcondylas at Milan and philosophy under Nicolo
Leoniceno at Ferrara. His culture recommended him to the
humanist Leo X, who in 1515 sent him to Germany as his nuncio;
later on Clement VII showed him especial favour, and employed
him as ambassador. In 1532 the Emperor Charles V made him a
count palatine. In spite of the banishment from Vicenza
pronounced upon him in 1509 because his family had favoured the
plans of Maximilian, he was held in honour throughout Italy.
Wherever he abode his home was a centre for gatherings of
scholars, litterateurs, and the most cultured men of the time.
His family life was far from happy, apparently through little
fault of his own. In the history of modern European literature
Trissino occupies a prominent place because of his tragedy
"Sofonisba" (1515; recent ed., Bologna, 1884), the first tragedy
in Italian to show deference to the classic rules. Constantly a
partisan of Aristotelean regularity, he disapproved of the
genial freedom of the chivalrous epic as written by Ariosto. In
his own composition the "Italia liberata dai Goti" (1547-8),
dealing with the campaigns of Belisarius in Italy, he sought to
show that it was possible to write in the vernacular an epic in
accordance with the classic precepts. The result is a cold and
colourless composition.
He was one of the many who engaged in the discussion as to what
is true literary Italian. Following the lead of Dante, he
espoused in his "Castellano" (1529) the indefensible theory that
the language is a courtly one made up of contributions from the
refined centres in Italy, instead of being, as it is,
fundamentally of Tuscan origin. For clearness he proposed that
in writing Italian certain new characters (derived from the
Greek alphabet) abe adopted to show the difference between open
and close e and o and voiced and voiceless s and z. This wise
proposition was ignored. "I Simillimi" (1548) which is a version
of the "Menaechmi" of Plautus, "I Ritratti" (1524) which is a
composite portrait of feminine beauty, and the "Poetica", which
contains his summing up of the Aristotelean principles of
literary composition, made up the rest of his important
writings. An edition of his collected works was published by
Maffei at Verona in 1729.
MORSOLIN, Giangiorgio Trissino (Florence, 1894); FLAMINI, Il
Cinquecento 132 sqq.; CIAMPOLINI, La prima tragedia regolare
della lett. ital. (Florence, 1896); ERMINI, L'Italia lib. di
G.T. (Rome, 1893).
J.D.M. FORD
Tritheists
Tritheists
(TRITHEITES).
Heretics who divide the Substance of the Blessed Trinity.
(1) Those who are usually meant by the name were a section of
the Monophysites, who had great influence in the second half of
the sixth century, but have left no traces save a few scanty
notices in John of Ephesus, Photus, Leontius, etc. Their founder
is said to be a certain John Ascunages, head of a Sophist school
at Antioch. But the principal writer was John Philoponus, the
great Aristotelean commentator. The leaders were two bishops,
Conon of Tarsus and Eugenius of Seleucia in Isauria, who were
deposed by their comprovinicals and took refuge at
Constantinople. There they found a powerful convert and
protector in Athanasius the Monk, a grandson of the Empress
Theodora. Philoponus dedicated to him a book on the Trinity. The
old philosopher pleaded his infirmities when he was summoned by
Justinian to the Court to give an account of his teaching. But
Conon and Eugenius had to dispute in the reign of Justin II
(565-78) in the presence of the Catholic patriarch, John
Scholasticus (565-77), with two champions of the moderate
Monophysite party, Stephen and Paul, the latter afterwards
Patriarch of Antioch. The Tritheist bishops refused to
anathematize Philoponus, and brought proofs that he agreed with
Severus and Theodosius. They were banished to Palestine, and
Philoponus wrote a book against John Scholasticus, who had given
his verdict in favour of his adversaries. But he developed a
theory of his own as to the Resurrection (see EUTYCHIANISM) on
account of which Conon and Eugenius wrote a treatise against him
in collaboration with Themistus, the founder of the Agnoctae, in
which they declared his views to be altogether unchristian. The
two bishops together with a deprived bishop named Theonas
proceeded to consecrate bishops for their sect, which they
established in Corinth and Athens, in Rome and Africa, and in
the Western Patriarchate, while their agents travelled through
Syria and Cilicia, Isauria and Cappadocia, converting whole
districts, and ordaining priests and deacons in cities villages,
and monasteries. Eugenius died in Pamphylia; Conon returned to
Constantinople. We are assured by Leontius that it was the
Aristoteleanism of Philoponus which made him teach that there
are in the Holy Trinity three partial substances (merikai
ousiai, ikikai theotetes, idiai physeis) and one common. The
genesis of the heresy has been explained (for the first time)
under MONOPHYSITES, where an account of Philoponus's writings
and those of Stephen Gobarus, another member of the sect, will
be found.
(2) In the Middle Ages Roscellin of Compiegne, the founder of
Nominalism, argued, just like Philoponus, that unless the Three
Persons are tres res, then the whole Trinity must have been
incarnate. He was refuted by St. Anselm.
(3) Among Catholic writers, Pierre Faydit, who was expelled from
the Oratory at Paris in 1671 for disobedience and died in 1709,
fell into the error of Tritheism in his "Eclaireissements sur la
doctrine et Phistoire ecclesiastiqes des deux premiers siecles"
(Paris, 1696), in which he tried to make out that the earliest
Fathers were Tritheists. He was replied to by the
Premonstratensian Abbot Louis-Charles Hugo ("Apologie du systeme
des Saints Peres sur la Trinite," Luxemburg, 1699). A canon of
Treves named Oembs, who was infected with the doctrines of the
"Enlightenment", similarly attributed to the Fathers his own
view of three similar natures in the Trinity, calling the
numerical unity of God an invention of the Scholastics. His
book, "Opuscula de Deo Uno et Trino" (Mainz, 1789), was
condemned by Pius VII in a Brief of 14 July, 1804. Gunther is
also accused of Tritheism.
(4) Among Protestants, Heinrich Nicolai (d. 1660), a professor
at Dantzig and at Elbing (not to be confounded with the founder
of the Familisten), is cited. The best known is William
Sherlock, Dean of St. Paul's, whose "Vindication of the Doctrine
of the Trinity" (London, 1690) against the Socinians was
attacked by Robert South in "Animadversions on Dr. Sherlock's
Vindication" (1693). Sherlock's work is said to have made
William Manning a Socinian and Thomas Emlyn an Arian, and the
dispute was ridiculed in a skit entitled "The Battle Royal",
attributed to William Pittis (1694?), which was translated into
Latin at Cambridge. Joseph Bingham, author of the "Antiquities",
preached at Oxford in 1695 a sermon which was considered to
represent the Fathers as Tritheists, and it was condemned by the
Hebdomadal Council as falsa, impia et haeretica, the scholar
being driven from Oxford.
For bibliography see MONOPHYSITES.
JOHN CHAPMAN
John Trithemius
John Trithemius
A famous scholar and Benedictine abbot, b. at Trittenheim on the
Moselle, 1 February, 1462; d. at Wuerzburg, 13 December, 1516.
The abbot himself, in his "Nepiachus", gives an account of his
youth, which was a time of hard suffering owing to the harsh
treatment of his selfish stepfather, who allowed the talented
boy to grow up in complete ignorance till the age of fifteen,
when he learned reading and writing as well as the rudiments of
Latin in a remarkably short time. But as his persecution at home
did not cease, he ran away, and after a painful journey
succeeded in reaching Wuerzburg, where the well-known humanist,
Jacob Wimpheling, was teaching; here the ambitious youth pursued
his classical studies till 1482. In order to revisit his home he
determined to make an excursion to the neighbourhood of Treves
accompanied by a comrade; it was January and the young men
travelled afoot. A short visit to the monastery of Sponheim was
to prove of decisive importance for the young Trithemius; hardly
had the travellers taken leave of the monks when a snowstorm
obliged them to return to the monastery. At the invitation of
the prior, Henry of Holzhausen, who had quickly discerned the
talents of his young guest, Trithemius remained in Sponheim;
eight days later he received the habit of the order and made his
vows in the same year, 8 December. His life in the monastery was
exemplary; he commanded the respect of his brethren, and the
love of his superiors. The proof of the respect in which he was
held by all was the fact that although he was the youngest
member of the community, and had not yet been ordained, he was
elected abbot at the age of twenty-two, during the second year
of his life in the order. His election was a great blessing for
Sponheim. With youthful vigour and a firm hand he undertook the
direction of the much-neglected monastery. He first turned his
attention to the material needs of his community, then set
himself to the much more difficult task of restoring its
discipline. Above all, his own example, not only in the
conscientious observance of the rules of the order, but also in
the tireless pursuit of scientific studies, brought about the
happiest results.
In order to promote effectively scientific research, he procured
a rich collection of books which comprised the most important
works in all branches of human knowledge; in this way he built
up the world-renowned library of Sponheim for the enriching of
which he laboured unceasingly for twenty-three years till the
collection numbered about 2000 volumes. This library, unique in
those days, made Sponheim known throughout the entire world of
learning. The attractive personality of the abbot also helped to
spread the fame of the monastery. Among his friends he numbered,
not only the most learned men of his time, such as Celtes,
Reuchlin, and John of Dalberg, but also many princes --
including the Emperor Maximilian, who held him in great esteem.
But the farther his reputation extended in the world the greater
became the number of malcontents in the monastery who opposed
the abbot's discipline. Finally he resigned as head of his
beloved abbey, which he had ruled for twenty-three years, and
which he had brought to a most flourishing condition; after his
departure the monastery sank into its former insignificance. The
Emperor Maximilian desired to bring the famous scholar to his
Court, and to make him the historiographer of the Imperial House
with a life-long pension; he was also promised rich abbeys. But
Trithemius sought the quiet and peace of a more retired life,
and this he found as abbot of the Scottish monastery of St.
Jacob, at Wuerzburg (1506). Here he found only three monks, so
he had ample opportunity to display the same activity he had
shown at Sponheim. He spent the last ten years of his life in
the production of many important writings. Only once did he
leave his monastery (1508) for a short stay at the imperial
Court. He died at fifty-five years of age and was buried in the
Scottish church at Wuerzburg.
The Order of St. Benedict was indebted to this energetic abbot
for his zealous promotion of the Bursfeld Congregation, for his
encouragement of learning in the order, and for his earnest
furtherance of monastic discipline. "The great abbot", says one
of his biographers, "was equally worthy of respect as a man, as
a religious, and as a writer." Of his more than eighty works
only part have appeared in print. The greater number of these
are ascetical writings which treat of the religious life and
were published by John Busaeus, S.J., under the title "Joannis
Trithemii opera pia et spiritualia" (Mainz, 1604); they are
among the best works of devotional literature produced at the
time. Marquard Freher published a part of his historical works
as "Joannis Trithemii opera historica" (Frankfort, 1601). This
collection, however, did not include the two famous folio
volumes, published in 1690 under the title of "Annales
Hirsaugiensis". Trithemius also wrote interesting contributions
on points of natural science, then much debated, and on
classical literature. The question whether he, by citing two
otherwise unknown authorities (Megiahard and Kunibald), was
guilty of intentional forgery, is still under debate by some
critics. Surely the inscription on his tomb testifies to the
truth:
Hanc meruit statuam Germanae gloria gentis Abbas Trithemius, quem
tegit ista domus
(The Abbot Trithemius, the glory of the German race, whom this house
covers, merited this statue).
[Note: A portrait of John Trithemius was printed in Thevet's
Livre des Vrais Pourtraits, Paris, 1584.]
SILBERNAGEL, Joh. Trithemius (Landshut, 1868); RULAND in
Chiliancum, new ser., I, 45-68 (Bonn, 1869); SCHNEEGANS, Abt.
Joh. Trithemius u. Kloster Sponheim (Kreuznach, 1882);
JANSSEN-PASTOR, Geschichte des Deutschen Volkes, I (Freiburg,
1897).
NICHOLAS SCHEID
Trivento
Trivento
(Triventensis)
Diocese in southern Italy. The earliest bishop was St. Castus of
an uncertain epoch, the local legend assigning him to the fourth
century. Other bishops were: the monk Leo, intruded and deposed
by Agapetus I (946); Alferius (1109); the Franciscan Luca
(1226), exiled by King Manfred; Pietro dell' Aquila (1348),
noted for his learning; Giulio Cesare Moriconda (1582), who
restored the cathedral, rearranged the archives, and erected a
seminary; Alfonso Moriconda (1717), O.S.B., a learned prelate
who restored the cathedral and the episcopal residence. The
diocese is suffragan of Beneventum; it has 58 parishes with
130,000 souls, 160 secular priests, and three religious houses.
CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI (Venice, 1844), 469.
U. BENIGNI
Nicholas Trivet
Nicholas Trivet
(Or "Trevet" as he himself wrote it)
B. about 1258; d. 1328. He was the son of Thomas Trevet, a judge
who came of a Norfolk or Somerset family. He became a Dominican
in London, and studied first at Oxford, then at Paris, where he
first took an interest in English and French chronicles. Little
is known of his life except that at one time he was prior of his
order in London, and at another he was teaching at Oxford. He
was the author of a large number of theological and hstorical
works and commentaries on the classics, more especially the
works of Seneca. A large number of these exist in MS. in various
libraries, but only two appear to have been printed, one being
the work by which he is chiefly remembered, the chronicle of the
Angevin kings of England, the other was the last twelve books of
his commentary on St. Augustine's treatise "De civitate dei".
The full title of the former work is "Annales sex regum Angliae
qui a comitibus Andegavensibus originem traxerunt", an important
historical source for the period 1136-1307, containing a
specially valuable account of the reign of Edward I. Trivet also
wrote a chronicle in French, parts of which were printed by
Spelman, and from which Chaucer is believed to have derived the
"Man of Law's Tale". His theological works include commentaries
on parts of the Scripture, a treatise on the Mass and some
writings on Scholastic theology.
HOG, preface to Trivet's Chronicle, Eng. Hist. Soc. (London,
1845); TRIVET, Annales sex Regum Angliae (Oxford, 1719); HARDY,
Descriptive Catalogue (London, 1871); KINGSFORD in Dict. Nat.
Biog., with exhaustive list of MSS.; CHEVALIER, Repertoire des
sources historiques du moyen age (Paris, 1905), gives a list of
earlier references.
EDWIN BURTON
Troas
Troas
A suffragan of Cyzicus in the Hellespont. The city was first
called Sigia; it was enlarged and embellished by Antigonus, who
peopled it with inhabitants drawn from other cities, and
surnamed it Antigonia Troas (Strabo, 604, 607); it was finally
enlarged by Lysimachus, who called it Alexandria Troas (Strabo,
593; Pliny, V, 124). The name Troas is the one most used. For
having remained faithful to the Romans during their war against
Antiochus, Troas was favoured by them (Titus Livius, XXXV, 42;
XXXVII, 35); it became afterwards Colonia Alexandria Augusta
Troas. Augustus, Hadrian and the rich grammarian Herodes Atticus
contributed greatly to its embellishment; the aqueduct still
preserved is due to the latter. Julius Caesar and Constantine
the Great thought of making Troas the capital of the Roman
Empire. St. Luke came to Troas to join St. Paul and accompany
him to Europe (Acts, xvi, 8-11); there also many of St. Paul's
friends joined him at another time and remained a week with him
(Acts, xx, 4-12). A Christian community existed there and it was
at that place that Eutychus was resuscitated by the Apostle. He
mentions his sojourn there (II Cor., ii, 12), and he asks
Timotheus to bring him his cloak and his books which he had left
with Carpus (II Tim., iv, 13). St. Ignatius of Antioch stopped
at Troas before going to Rome (Ad Philad., XI, 2; Ad Smyrn.,
XII, 1). Several of its bishops are known: Marinus in 325,
Niconius in 344, Sylvanus at the beginning of the fifth century;
Pionius in 451, Leo in 787, Peter, friend of the patriarch
Ignatius, and Michael, his adversary, in the ninth century. In
the tenth century Troas is given as a suffragan of Cyzicus and
distinct from the famous Ilium (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . .Texte
der Notitiae episcopatuum", 552; Idem, "Georgii Cyprii
descriptio orbis romani", 64); it is not known when the city was
destroyed and the diocese disappeared. To-day Troas is Eski-
Stambul in the sanjak of Bigha.
LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, I, 777; TEXIER, Asie mineure
(Paris, 1862), 194-97; LEBAS-WADDINGTON, Asie mineure, 1035-37,
1730-40; PAULY-WISSOWA, Real-Encyclopadie fur clas.
Altertumswissenschaft, s. v. Alexandria Troas.
S. VAILHE
Trocmades
Trocmades
(Trocmada)
Titular see of Galatia Secunda, suffragan of Pessinus. No
geographer or historian mentions a city of this name; Hierocles
(Synecemus, 698, 1) gives "regio Trocnades", instead of
Regetnoknada, referring, doubtless, to the Galatian name of some
tribe on the left bank of the Sangarius; its principal centre
was probably in the present village of Kaimez, about twenty-four
miles east of Eski Shehir, a vilayet of Broussa. All the
"Notitiae episcopatuum" up to the thirteenth century mention the
see Trokmadon among the suffragans of Pessinus; the two most
recent (thirteenth century) call it Lotinou; perhaps it should
be Plotinou, from St. Plotinus, venerated there. The official
lists of the Roman Curia give Trocmadae. Le Quien (Oriens
christianus, I, 493), gives Trocmada. From these erroneous forms
arises a confusion of the name with the Galatian tribe of
Trocmi. The last named author gives a list of the known bishops:
Cyriacus, who represented his metropolitan at the Robber Synod
of Ephesus (449), and was represented by a priest at the Council
of Chalcedon (451); Theodore, present at the Council of
Constantinople (681); Leo, at Nicaea (787); Constantine at the
Photian Council of Constantinople (879). Cyriacus, said to have
assisted at the Council of Nicaea (325), is not mentioned in the
authentic lists of bishops present at that council.
S. PETRIDES
John de Trokelowe
John de Trokelowe
(THROWLOW, or THORLOW)
A monastic chronicler still living in 1330, but the dates of
whose birth and death are unknown. He was a Benedictine monk of
St. Albans who in 1294 was living in the dependent priory of
Tynemouth, Northumberland. The prior and monks endeavoured to
sever connection with St. Albans and to obtain independence by
presenting the advowson to the king; but abbot John of
Berkamsted resisted this arrangement, visited Tynemouth, and
sent Trokelow with other monks as prisoners back to St. Alban's.
There Trokelowe wrote his "Annales" including the period 1259 to
1296 and a useful account of the reign of Edward II, from 1307
to 1323, after which date his chronicle was continued by Henry
de Blaneford. A reference made by Trokelowe to the execution of
Mortimer shows that he was writing after 1330.
RILEY, Johannis de Trokelowe et Henrici de Blaneforde chronica
et annales in Rolls Series (London, 1866). See also RILEY,
Introduction to RISHANGER, Chronicle in the Chronica monastica
S. Albani in the same series. HARDY, Descriptive Catalogue
(London, 1871); HUNT in Dict. Nat. Biog.
EDWIN BURTON
Ancient See of Trondhjem
Ancient See of Trondhjem
(NIDAROS).
In Norway it was the kings who introduced Christianity, which
first became known to the people during their martial
expeditions (Hergenroether, "Kirchengeschichte", 1879, II, 721).
The work of Christianization begun by Haakon the Good (d: 981)
(Maurer, "Die Bekehrung des norwegischen Stammes", Munich, 1855,
I, ii, 168) was carried on by Olaf Trygvesson (d. 1002) and Olaf
Haraldsson (St. Olaf, d. 1030). Both were converted vikings, the
former having been baptized at Andover, England, by Bishop
Aelfeah of Winchester, and the latter at Rouen by Archbishop
Robert (Bang, "Den norske Kirkes Historie under Katholicismen",
Christiania, 1887, 44, 50). In 997 Olaf Trygvesson founded at
the mouth of the River Nid the city of Nidaros, afterwards
called Trondhjem, where he built a royal palace and a church; he
laboured to spread the truths of Christianity in Norway, the
Orkney and Shetland Islands, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and
Greenland (Maurer, op. cit., I, iii, 462). King Olaf Haraldsson
created an episcopal see at Nidaros, installing the monk
Grimkill as bishop. Moreover, many English and German bishops
and priests laboured in Norway, and by degrees Christianity
softened the rough instincts of the people. The Norwegian
bishops were at first dependent on the Archbishop of
Hamburg-Bremen, and afterwards on the Archbishop of Lund,
Primate of Scandinavia. As the Norwegians nevertheless wanted an
archbishop of their own, Eugene III, resolving to create a
metropolitan see at Trondhjem, sent thither as legate (1151)
Cardinal Nicholas of Albano (Nicholas Breakspeare), afterwards
Adrian IV. The legate installed Jon Birgerson, previously Bishop
of Stavanger, as Archbishop of Trondhjem. The bishops of Oslo
(bishop 1073), Bergen (about 1060), Stavanger (1130), Hamar
(1151), the Orkneys (1070), Iceland (Skalholt, 1056; Holar,
1105), and Greenland became suffragans.
Archbishop Birgerson was succeeded by Eystein (Beatus
Augustinus, 1158-88), previously royal secretary and treasurer,
a man of brilliant intellect, strong will, and deep piety (Daae,
"Norges Helgener", Christiania, 1879, 170-6). Such a man was
then needed to defend the liberty of the Church against the
encroachments of King Sverre, who wished to make the Church a
mere tool of the temporal power. The archbishop was compelled to
flee from Norway to England. It is true that he was able to
return and that a sort of reconciliation took place later
between him and the king, but on Eystein's death Sverre renewed
his attacks, and Archbishop Eric had to leave the country and
take refuge with Archbishop Absalon of Lund. At last, when
Sverre attacked the papal legate, Innocent III laid the king and
his partisans under interdict (Baluze, "Epp. Innocentii III",
Paris, 1682, I, i, 226, 227). King Haakon (1202), son and
successor of Sverre, hastened to make peace with the Church,
whose liberty had been preserved by the unflinching attitude of
the pope and his archbishops. What would have happened, asks the
Protestant ecclesiastical historian of Norway, Dr. A. Chr. Bang,
"if the Church, deprived of all liberty, had become the
submissive slave of absolute royalty? What influence would it
have exercised at a time when its chief mission was to act as
the educator of the people and as the necessary counterpoise to
defend the liberty of the people against the brutal whims of the
secular lords? And what would have happened when a century later
royalty left the country? After that time the Church was in
reality the sole centre about which was grouped the whole
national life of our country" (op. cit., 109). To regulate
ecclesiastical affairs, which had suffered during the struggles
with Sverre, Innocent IV in 1247 sent Cardinal William of Sabina
as legate to Norway. He intervened against certain encroachments
on the part of the bishops, reformed various abuses, and
abolished the ordeal by hot iron. Owing in great measure to the
papal legates, Norway became more closely linked with the
supreme head of Christendom at Rome. Secular priests,
Benedictines, Cistercians, Augustinians, Dominicans, and
Franciscans worked together for the prosperity of the Church.
Archbishops Eilif Kortin (d. 1332), Paul Baardson (d. 1346), and
Arne Vade (d. 1349) showed specially remarkable zeal. Provincial
councils were held, at which serious efforts were made to
eliminate abuses and to encourage Christian education and
morality (Bang, op. cit., 297).
Nidaros (Trondhjem), the metropolis of the ecclesiastical
province, was also the capital of Norway. The residence of the
kings until 1217, it remained until the troubles of the
Reformation the heart and centre of the spiritual life of the
country. There was situated the tomb of St. Olaf, and around the
patron of Norway, "Rex perpetuus Norvegiae", the national and
ecclesiastical life of the country was centred. Pilgrims flocked
from all quarters to the tomb. The feast of St. Olaf on 29 July
was a day or reunion for "all the nations of the Northern seas,
Norwegians, Swedes, Goths, Cimbrians, Danes, and Slavs", to
quote an old chronicler ("Adami gesta pontificum
Hammaburgensium", Hanover, 1876, II, 82), in the cathedral of
Nidaros, where the reliquary of St. Olaf rested near the altar.
Built in Roman style by King Olaf Kyrre (d. 1093), the dome had
been enlarged by Archbishop Eystein in Ogival style. It was
finished only in 1248 by Archbishop Sigurd Sim. Although several
times destroyed by fire, the ancient dome was restored each time
until the storms of the Reformation. Then Archbishop Eric
Walkendorf was exiled (1521), and his successor, Olaf
Engelbertsen, who had been the instrument of the royal will in
the introduction of Lutheranism, had also, as a partisan of
Christian II, to fly from Christian III (1537). The valuable
reliquaries of St. Olaf and St. Augustine (Eystein) were taken
away, sent to Copenhagen, and melted. The bones of St. Olaf were
buried in the cathedral, and the place forgotten. But when
Norway regained its liberty and resumed it placed among
independent nations (1814), the memory of the glory of its
ancestors awoke. It was resolved to rebuild the ancient dome,
and the cathedral stands once more renewed, although not in
possession of the religion which created it. But new churches
have arisen in the city of St. Olaf, bearing witness that the
Catholic Faith still lives in Scandinavia in spite of all its
trials.
Besides the works cited above see: MUNCH, Throndhjems Domkirke
(Christiania, 1859); KREFTING, Om Throndhjems Domkirke
(Trondhjem, 1885); SCHIRMER, Kristkirken; Nidaros (Christiania,
1885); MATHIESEN, Det gamle Throndhjem (Christiani, 1897).
GUSTAF ARMFELT
Trope
Trope
Definition and Description
Trope, in the liturgico-hymnological sense, is a collective name
which, since about the close of the Middle Ages or a little
later, has been applied to texts of great variety (in both
poetry and prose) written for the purpose of amplifying and
embellishing an independently complete liturgical text (e.g. the
Introit, the Kyrie, Gloria, Gradual, or other parts of the Mass
or of the Office sung by the choir). These additions are closely
attached to the official liturgical text, but in no way do they
change the essential character of it; they are entwined in it,
augmenting and elucidating it; they are, as it were, a more or
less poetical commentary that is woven into the liturgical text,
forming with it a complete unit. Thus in France and England,
instead of the liturgical text "Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus,
Dominus Deus Sabaoth" the lines sung were:
1. Sanctus ex quo sunt omnia;
2. Sanctus, per quem sunt omnia;
3. Sanctus, in quo sunt omnia; Dominus Deus Sabaoth, tibi gloria
sit in saecula.
The most accurate definition, applicable to all the different
kinds of Tropes, might be the following: A Trope is an
interpolation in a liturgical text, or the embellishment brought
about by interpolation (i.e. by introductions, insertions, or
additions). Herein lies the difference between the Trope and the
closely- related Sequence or Prose. The Sequence also is an
embellishment of the liturgy, an insertion between liturgical
chants (the Gradual and the Gospel), originating about the
eighth century; the Sequence is thus an interpolation in the
liturgy, but it is not an interpolation in a liturgical text.
The Sequence is an independent unit, complete in itself; the
Trope, however, forms a unit only in connection with a
liturgical text, and when separated from the latter is often
devoid of any meaning. Accordingly the several Tropes are named
after that liturgical text to which they belong, viz. Trope of
the Kyrie, Trope of the Gloria, Trope of the Agnus Dei, etc.
Originally there existed no uniform name for that which is now
combined under the idea and name of Tropus. Only the
interpolations of the Introit, the Offertory, and the Communion
were called Tropi (trophi, tropos, trophos), and even that not
exclusively but only predominantly; for the Introit Trope was
frequently called "Versus in psalmis", the Offertory Trope also
"Prosa [or prosula] ad [or ante] Offerenda". To all the other
interpolations a great variety of names was applied, as "Prosae
de Kyrieleison", or "Versus ad Kyrieleison", = Kyrie Tropes;
"Laudes" (Lauda, laus), "Gloria cum laudes", "Laudes cum
tropis", or simply "Ad Gloria", = Gloria Tropes; "Laudes ad
Sanctus", "Versus super Sanctus", = Sanctus Tropes; "Laudes de
Agnus Dei", "Prosa ad Agnus Dei", = Agnus Tropes; "Epistola cum
Versibus", "Versus super epistolam", = Epistle Trope (Epitre
farcie); "Verba", or "Verbeta", or "Prosella", = Breviary Trope.
How and when the general name of Tropus sprang up, has not yet
been exactly ascertained. And just as little has the priority
been established of the different kinds of interpolations,
whether that in the Introit is the oldest, or that in the
Gloria, or the Kyrie, or in any other part of the Mass; for that
very reason it is not known yet which of the various
designations (Versus, Prosae, Tropi, or Laudes) is the oldest
and most original.
One thing is certain: the Latin Tropus is a word borrowed from
the Greek tropos. The latter was a musical term, and denoted a
melody (tropos lydios, phrygios = Lydian, Phrygian, Doric
melody), or in general a musical change, like the Latin modus or
modulus, similar to the international "modulation". It is quite
conceivable that the name of the melody was transferred to the
text which had been composed to it, as is the case with the word
Sequentia. In reasoning thus, one would have to presuppose that
over one syllable of a liturgical text, e.g. over the e of the
Kyrie, a longer melisma was sung, which bore the name of tropus;
furthermore, that to such a melisma a text was composed later
on, and that this text was also called "Tropus". And it is an
actual fact that from early times such melismata existed over a
vowel of the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Sanctus, etc.; likewise
there were many texts which were produced for these melismata,
consequently they were interpolations. But the date when these
melismata of the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, etc., were first called
"Tropi" is still a matter of research; what we know is that the
texts under that kind of melisma which has just been described
were not called "Tropi" from the earliest times. On the
contrary, by the name of "Tropi" were originally designated the
interpolations of precisely those parts of the Mass which do not
exhibit any long melismata, as the Introit and Offertory. To
give an example, an interpolation of the Christmas Introit
written in prose, reads: Ecce, adest de quo prophetae cecinerunt
dicentes;
Puer natus est nobis,
Quem virgo Maria genuit,
Et filius datus est nobis, etc.
The first introductory phrase of this and similar
interpolations, particularly when it comprises an entire stanza,
as, e.g.,
Laudemus omnes Dominum,
Qui virginis per uterum
Parvus in mundum venerat
Mundum regens, quem fecerat,
Puer natus est nobis, etc.
cannot possibly be considered as text to an already existing
melisma which was called "Tropus", and which then gave its name
to the text that was put to it. And yet, just such
interpolations of the Introit and the Offertory were called
"Tropi". In this article it must suffice to allude to these
difficulties, on the solution of which will depend the theory of
the origin and the early development of the "Tropi". As yet no
definite theory can be advanced, although several writers on
liturgy, music, and hymnology have been so confident as to make
assertions for which there is absolutely no ground.
Division
On the basis of the two choir books for the Mass and the
Breviary, namely the Gradual and the Antiphonal, Tropes are
divided into two large classes: "Tropi Graduales" and "Tropi
Antiphonales," i.e. Tropes of such parts of the Mass and of the
Breviary as are chanted. The latter are of slightly later date,
are chiefly limited to interpolations of the Responsory after
the Lessons, and are almost exclusively insertions into one of
the concluding words of such Responsory. Their entire structure
resembles so much the structure of the Sequences of the first
epoch, upon which they were undoubtedly modelled, that later on
they were often used as independent Sequences. Such is the case
with the oldest Breviary Trope of the Blessed Virgin, which is
built upon the penultimate word, inviolata, of the Responsory of
the Assumption: "Gaude Maria virgo . . . et post partum
inviolata permansisti." The syllable la of inviolata was the
bearer of a long melisma; to this melisma towards the close of
the tenth century in France the following text was composed:
1a. Invio-lata integra et casta es, Maria, 1b. Quae es effecta
fulgida regis porta. 2a. O mater alma Christi carissima, 2b. Suscipe
pia laudum precamina 3a. Nostra ut pura pectora sint et corpora. 3b.
Quae nunc flagitant devota corda et ora, 4a. Tu da per precata
dulcisona, 4b. Nobis perpetua frui vita, 5. O benigna, quae sola
inviolata permansisti.
Of a similar structure are all the Breviary Tropes or "Verbeta",
and they are dovetailed, as shown above, more or less
ingeniously, between the penultimate and last word of their
Responsory.
The "Tropi Graduales" in their turn are divided into two
classes, namely into "Tropi ad Ordinarium Missae" or to the
unchangeable text of the Mass, i.e. to the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo,
Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and Ite missa est, and into "Tropi ad
Proprium Missarum" or to those parts of the text which change
according to the respective feast, i.e. to the Introit, Lesson,
Gradual, Offertory, and Communion. This latter class frequently
differs from the former also in the external structure of its
Tropes; and at first it was the most widespread; it might
perhaps even claim to be the oldest and most original; but it
disappeared at a relatively early date, whereas the "Tropi ad
Ordinarium Missae" still kept their place in liturgy for a
considerable time.
History and Significance
The origin of the Tropes, that is to say of the Gradual Tropes
(since the Antiphonal Tropes are evidently of a later date),
must almost coincide with that of the Proses or Sequences which
are most closely related to them; this would mean that their
history begins somewhere in the eighth century. Whether the
Trope or the Sequence was the older form is all the more
difficult to decide, since the Sequence itself is to a certain
degree a kind of Trope. The St. Martial Troper, the oldest one
known, of the middle of the tenth century (Cod. Parisin., 1240),
abounds in Tropes to the Introit, Gradual, Offertory, and
Communion; in other words it has a great many "Tropi ad Proprium
Missarum". In addition it contains thirteen Gloria Tropes, but
only two of the Sanctus, and not one of the Kyrie. Comparatively
poor in Tropes are the St. Gall Tropers, and this fact alone
makes it extremely doubtful whether Tutilo of St. Gall was the
inventor of the Tropes. It appears that the Trope, like the
Sequence, originated in France, where from the tenth century
onward it enjoyed great popularity and was most eagerly
cultivated. From there it soon made its way to England and to
Northern Italy, later to Central and Southern Italy, and became
widespread in all these countries, less so, however, in Germany.
It was known there as early as in the ninth century, since
Tutilo of St. Gall can rightly be considered a composer of
Tropes. It remains a curious fact that in spite of the great
number of Tropes no poet can be named who gained distinction as
a composer of Tropes. In the thirteenth century this once
important branch of literature began to decline and survived
almost exclusively in Kyrie Tropes, particularly in France until
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
Regarding the poetical contents, the Tropes, with few
exceptions, are of no great value. But this peculiar poetical
production is all the more interesting for the student of
liturgy, and especially great is its significance in the
development of music and poetry. It is worthy of note that,
instead of short insertions into the liturgical text, as time
went on several verses, entire stanzas, even a number of
stanzas, were fitted in. The non-essential part developed into
the main work; the liturgical text withdrew entirely into the
background, and was scarcely even considered as the
starting-point. In this manner the Tropes grew to be independent
cantions, motets, or religious folk-songs. Also the dramatic
character, which was quite peculiar to many Introit Tropes at
Christmas and Easter, developed more and more luxuriantly until
it reached its highest perfection in larger dramatic scenes,
mystery plays, and plays of a purely religious character. Tropes
finally left the liturgical and religious ground altogether, and
wandered away from the spiritual to the profane field of songs
of love, gambling, and drinking. And for that reason many
specimens of religious as well as secular poetry of later date
can be fully understood only when they are traced back to their
source, the Tropes. The importance from a musical standpoint of
both the Tropes and the Sequences has been most suitably
characterized by Rev. Walter Howard Frere in his introduction to
"The Winchester Troper" where he says: "For the musician the
whole story is full of interest, for the Tropers practically
represent the sum total of musical advance between the ninth and
the twelfth century. . . . All new developments in musical
composition, failing to gain admission into the privileged
circle of the recognised Gregorian service-books, were thrown
together so as to form an independent musical collection
supplementary to the official books; and that is exactly what a
Troper is" (op. cit., p. vi).
FRERE, The Winchester Troper (London, 1894); WOLF, Ueber die
Lais (Heidelberg, 1841); GAUTIER, Les Tropes (Paris, 1886);
REINERS, Tropen-Gesange u. ihre Melodien (Luxemburg, 1887);
BLUME AND BANNISTER, Tropi Graduales ad ordinarium Missae in
Analecta hymnica, XLVII (Leipzig, 1905); BLUME, Tropi Graduales
ad Proprium Missarum in Anal. Hymn., XLIX (Leipzig, 1906).
CLEMENS BLUME
Scriptural Tropology
Scriptural Tropology
The theory and practice of interpreting the figurative meaning
of Holy Writ. The literal meaning, or God-intended meaning of
the words of the Bible, may be either figurative or
non-figurative; for instance, in Canticles, the inspired meaning
is always figurative. The typical meaning is the inspired
meaning of words referring to persons, things, and actions of
the Old Testament which are inspired types of persons, things,
and actions of the New (cf. Exegesis).
WALTER DRUM
John Thomas Troy
John Thomas Troy
Archbishop of Dublin; b. in the parish of Blanchardstown, near
Dublin, 10 May, 1739; d. at Dublin, 11 May, 1823. He belonged to
an Anglo-Norman stock, and received his early education at
Liffey Street, Dublin, after which, in 1777 [This is probably a
typo for 1757 or 1767 -- Ed.], he joined the Dominican Order and
proceeded to their house of St. Clement, at Rome. Amenable to
discipline, diligent in his studies, and gifted with much
ability, he made rapid progress, and while yet a student was
selected to give lectures in philosophy. Subsequently he
professed theology and canon law, and finally became prior of
the convent in 1772. When the Bishop of Ossory died, in 1776,
the priests of the diocese recommended one of their number,
Father Molloy, to Rome for the vacant see, and the
recommendation was endorsed by many of the Irish bishops. But
Dr. Troy, who was held in high esteem at Rome, had already been
appointed Bishop of Ossory. He arrived at Kilkenny in August,
and for the next nine years he laboured hard for the spiritual
interests of his diocese. They were troubled times. Maddened by
excessive rents and tithes, and harried by grinding
tithe-proctors, the farmers had banded themselves together in a
secret society called the "Whiteboys". Going forth at night,
they attacked landlords, bailiffs, agents, and tithe-proctors,
and often committed fearful outrages. Bishop Troy grappled with
them and frequently and sternly denounced them. It was not that
he had any sympathy with oppression, but he had lived so long in
Rome and had left Ireland at such an early age, that he did not
quite understand the condition of things at home, and did not
fully appreciate the extent of misery and oppression in which
the poor Catholic masses lived.
The bent of his mind was to support authority, and he was
therefore ready to condemn all violent efforts for reform, and
had no hesitation in denouncing not only all secret societies in
Ireland, but also "our American fellow-subjects, seduced by
specious notions of liberty". This made him unpopular with the
masses, but there could be no doubt that he was zealous in
correcting abuses in his diocese and in promoting education. So
well was this recognized at Rome that in 1781, in consequence of
some serious troubles which had arisen between the primate and
his clergy, Dr. Troy was appointed Administrator of Armagh. This
office he held till 1782. In 1786 he was appointed Archbishop of
Dublin. At Dublin, as at Ossory, he showed his zeal for
religion, his sympathy with authority, and his distrust of
popular movements, especially when violent means were employed;
in 1798 he issued a sentence of excommunication against all
those of his flock who would join the rebellion. He was also one
of the most determined supporters of the Union. In 1799 he
agreed to accept the veto of government on the appointment of
Irish bishops; and even when the other bishops, finding that
they had been tricked by Pitt and Castlereagh, repudiated the
veto, Dr. Troy continued to favour it. The last years of his
life were uneventful.
BRADY, Episcopal Succession (Rome, 1876); CARRIGAN, History of
the Diocese of Ossory (Dublin, 1905); D'ALTON, History of the
Archbishops of Dublin (Dublin, 1838); WYSE, History of the
Catholic Association (London, 1829); MORAN, Spicilegium
Ossoriense (Dublin, 1874-84).
E.A. D'ALTON
Troyes
Troyes
(TRECENSIS).
Diocese comprising the Department of Aube. Re-established in
1802 as a suffragan of Paris, it then comprised the Departments
of Aube and Yonne, and its bishop had the titles of Troyes,
Auxerre, and Chalons-sur-Marne. In 1822 the See of Chalons was
created and the Bishop of Troyes lost that title. When Sens was
made an archdiocese the title of Auxerre went to it and Troyes
lost also the Department of Yonne, which became the Archdiocese
of Sens. The Diocese of Troyes at present covers, besides the
ancient diocesan limits, 116 parishes of the ancient Diocese of
Langres, and 20 belonging to the ancient Diocese of Sens. Since
1822 Troyes is a suffragan of Sens
The catalogue of bishops of Troyes, known since the ninth
century, is in the opinion of Duchesne, worthy of confidence.
The first bishop, St. Amator, seems to have preceded by a few
years Bishop Optatianus who probably ruled the diocese about
344. Among his successors are: St. Melanius (Melain) (390-400);
St. Ursus (Ours) (426); St. Lupus (Loup) (426-478), b. in 383,
who accompanied St. Germanus of Auxerre to England, forced the
Huns to spare Troyes, was led away as a hostage by Attila and
only returned to his diocese after many years of exile; St.
Camelianus (479-536); St. Vincent (536-46); St. Leuconius
(Leucon) (651-56); St. Bobinus (Bobin) (750-66), previously
Abbot of Monstier la Celle; St. Prudentius (845-61), who wrote
against Gottschalk and Johannes Scotus; Blessed Manasses
(985-93); Jacques BEnigne Bossuet (1716-42, nephew of the great
Bossuet; Etienne-Antoine de Boulogne (1809-25); Pierre-Louis
Caeur, the preacher (1849-60).
Louis the Stammerer in 878 received at Troyes the imperial crown
from the hands of Pope John VIII. At the end of the ninth
century the counts of Champagne chose Troyes as their capital.
In 1285, when Philip the Fair united Champagne to the royal
domain, the town kept a number of privileges. John the Fearless,
Duke of Burgundy and ally of the English, aimed in 1417 at
making Troyes the capital of France, and he came to an
understanding with Isabeau of Bavaria, wife of Charles VI of
France, that a court, council, and parliament with comptroller's
offices should be established at Troyes. It was at Troyes, then
in the hands of the Burgundians, that on 21 May, 1420, the
treatgy was signed by which Henry VI of England was betrothed to
Catherine, daughter of Charles VI, and was to succeed him to the
detriment of the dauphin. The dauphin, afterwards Charles VII,
and Blessed Joan of Arc recovered the town of Troyes in 1429.
The cathedral of Troyes is a fine Gothic structure begun in the
twelfth, and completed in the fifteenth, century; the ancient
collegiate Church of St. Urban is a Gothic building whose
lightness of treatment reminds one of La Sainte Chapelle at
Paris. It was built by Urban IV at the close of the thirteenth
century. He was a native of Troyes and on one of the
stained-glass windows he caused his father to be depicted,
working at his trade of tailor. The Abbey of Nesle la Riposte
was founded before 545 near Villenauxe, perhaps by Queen
Clotilde. In the sixteenth century the monks caused to be
rebuilt at Villenauxe, with the actual stones which they brought
from Nesle, the original doorway of Nesle Abbey, an interesting
monument of French history. The Benedictine Mabillon undertook
to interpret its carvings, among which might be seen the statue
of a reine pEdauque (i.e. a web-footed queen) supposed to be St.
Clotilde. The Abbey of Notre Dame aux Nonnains, founded by St.
Leucon, was an important abbey for women. Alcuin and St Bernard
corresponded with its abbesses. At his installation the bishop
went to the abbey on the previous evening; the bed he slept on
became his property, but the mule on which he rode became the
property of the abbess. The abbess led the bishop by the hand
into the chapter hall; she put on his mitre, offered him his
crozier, and in return the bishop promised to respect the rights
of the abbey. The Jansenists in the eighteenth century made a
great noise over the pretended cure by the deacon Paris of Marie
Madeleine de MEgrigny, a nun of Notre Dame aux Nonnains. The
part of the Diocese of Troyes which formerly belonged to the
Diocese of Langres contained the famous Abbey of Clairvaux (q.
v.). Concerning the Abbey of the Paraclete, founded by Abelard
and in which the Abbess Heloise died in 1163, and where her body
and that of Abelard were buried until 1792, see ABELARD. On 20
June, 1353, Geoffroy de Charny, Lord of Savoisy and Lirey,
founded at Lirey in honour of the Annunciation a collegiate
church with six canonries, and in this church he exposed for
veneration the Holy Winding Sheet. Opposition arose on the part
of the Bishop of Troyes, who declared after due inquiry that the
relic was nothing but a painting, and opposed its exposition.
Clement VI by four Bulls, 6 Jan., 1390, approved the exposition
as lawful. In 1418 during the civil wars, the canons entrusted
the Winding Sheet to Humbert, Count de La Roche, Lord of Lirey.
Margaret, widow of Humbert, never returned it but gave it in
1452 to the Duke of Savoy. The requests of the canons of Lirey
were unavailing, and the Lirey Winding Sheet is the same that is
now exposed and honoured at Turin (see TURIN).
Among the many saints specially honoured or connected with the
diocese are: St. Mathia, virgin, period uncertain; her relics
were found in Troyes in 980; St. Helena, virgin, whos life and
century are unknown, and whose body was transferred to Troyes in
1209; these two are patronesses of the town and diocese; St.
Oulph, martyr (second or third century); St. Savinianus, Apostle
of Troyes; St. Patroclus (Parre), St. Julius, St. Claudius, and
St. Venerandus, martyrs under Aurelian; St. Savina, martyred
under Diocletian; St. Syra, the wonder-worker (end of third
century); St. Ursion, pastor of Isle Aumont (c. 375); St.
Exuperantia, a religious of Isle Aumont (c. 380); St Balsemius
(Baussange), deacon, apostle of Arcis-sur-Aube, martyred by the
Vandals in 407; St. Mesmin and his companions and Saints Germana
and Honoria, martryred (451) under Attila; St. Aper (Evre),
Bishop of Toul, and his sister Evronia, natives of the diocese
(towards the close of the fifth century); St. Aventinus,
disciple of St. Loup (d. c. 537); St. Romanus, Archbishop of
Reims, founder of the Monastery of SS. Gervasus and Protasius at
Chantenay in the Diocese of Troyes (d. c. 537); St. Maurelius,
priest at Isle Aumont (d. C. 545); St. Lyaeus (LyE), second
Abbot of Mantenay (d. c. 545); St. Phal, Abbot at Isle Aumont
(d. c. 549); St. Bouin, priest and solitary (d. c. 570); St.
Potamius (Pouange), solitary (close of sixth century); St.
Vinebaud, Abbot of St. Loup of Troyes (d. 623); St. Flavitus,
solitary (563-630); St. Tancha, virgin and martyr (d. 637); St.
Victor, solitary (d. 640); St. Frobert, founder and first Abbot
of Montier le Celle (d. 688); St. Maura, virgin (827-850); St.
Adalricus (slain by the Normans about 925); St Aderaldus, canon
and archdeacon of Troyes, who died in 1004 on returning from the
Crusade, and who founded the Benedictine monastery of the Holy
Sepulchre in the diocese; St. Simon, Count de Bar-sur-Aube,
solitary, acted as mediator between Gregory VII and Robert
Guiscard, and died in 1082; St. Robert founder of Molesme and
Citeaux, a native of the diocese (1024-1108); St. Elizabeth of
Chelles, foundress of the monastery of Rosoy (d. c. 1130); St
Hombelina, first Abbess of Jully-sur-Sarce, and sister of St.
Bernard (1092-1135); Blessed Peter, an Englishman, prior of
Jully-sur-Sarce (d. 1139); St Malachy (q. v.), archbishop,
Primate of Ireland, died at Clairvaux (1098-1148); St. Bernard
(q. v.), first Abbot of Clairvaux (1091-1153); St. Belina,
virgin, slain about 1153 in defence of her chastity; Blessed
Menard and Blessed Herbert, abbots of the monastery at Mores
founded by St. Bernard (end of the twelfth century); Blessed
Jeanne, the recluse (d. 1246); Blessed Urban IV (1185-1264);
Blessed John of Ghent, hermit and porphet, who died at Troyes in
1439; Ven. Margaret Bourgeois (1620-1700), foundress of the
Congregation of Notre Dame at Montreal, a native of the diocese;
Ven. Marie de Sales Chappuis, superioress of the Visitation
Convent at Troyes (d. 1875). Cardinal Pierre de BErulle
(1575-1629) was brought up on the BErulle estate in the diocese.
He preached at Troyes before founding the Oratorians. An Oratory
was opened at Troyes in 1617. Charles-Louis de Lantage, b. at
Troyes in 1616, d. in 1694, was one of the chief helpers of M.
Olier, founder of the Sulpicians. Among natives of the diocese
may be mentioned: the Calvinist jurisconsult Pierrre Pithou
(1539-1596), one of the editors of the "Satire MEnippEe", a
native of Troyes; the painter Mignard (1610-95), born at Troyes;
the revolutionary leader, Danton (1759-1794), b. at
Arcis-sur-Aube.
The chief pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre Dame du Chene,
near Bar-sur-Seine, dates from 1667; Notre Dame de la Sainte
EspErance, at Mesnil-Saint-Loup; Notre Dame de Valsuzenay.
Before the application of the Associations Law (1901) there
were, in the Diocese of Troyes, Benedictines, Jesuits,
Lazarists, Oblates of St. Francis of Sales, and Brothers of the
Christian Schools. Many female congregations arose in the
diocese, among others the Ursulines of Christian Teaching,
founded at Moissy l'Eveque in the eighteenth century by
Montmorin, Bishop of Langres; the Sisters of Christian
Instruction, founded in 1819, with mother-house at Troyes; the
Oblate Sisters of St. Francis of Sales, a teaching order,
founded in 1870, with mother-house at Troyes; Sisters of Notre
Dame de Bon Secours, a nursing community with mother-house at
Troyes. In the diocese the religious congregations at the close
of the nineteenth century had charge of one foundling hospital,
20 nurseries, 2 orphanages for boys, 17 orphanages for girls, 2
houses of mercy, 11 hospitals or hospices, 9 houses of district
nursing sister, 1 epileptic home. In 1905 (at the breach of the
Concordat) the diocese numbered 246,163 inhabitants, 40 parish
priest, 383 chapels of ease, and 7 curacies supported by the
State. In 1910 there were 239,299 inhabitants, and 344 priests.
Gallia Christ., nova, XII (1770), 483-532, instrum., 247-296;
DUCHESNE, Fastes Episcopaux, II: DEFER, Vie des saints du
diocEse de Troyes, et hist. de leur culte (Troyes, 1865);
LALORE, Documents sur l'abbaye de Notre Dame aux Nonnains
(Troyes, 1874); PREVOST, Hist. du diocEse de Troyes pendant la
REvolution (3 vols., Troyes, 1908-9); CHEVALIER, Topobibl.,
3177-83.
GEORGES GOYAU
Truce of God
Truce of God
The Truce of God is a temporary suspension of hostilities, as
distinct from the Peace of God which is perpetual. The
jurisdiction of the Peace of God is narrower than that of the
Truce. Under the Peace of God are included only:
+ consecrated persons -- clerics, monks, virgins, and cloistered
widows;
+ consecrated places -- churches, monasteries, and cemeteries,
with their dependencies;
+ consecrated times -- Sundays, and ferial days, all under the
special protection of the Church, which punishes transgressors
with excommunication.
At an early date the councils extended the Peace of God to the
Church's proteges, the poor, pilgrims, crusaders, and even
merchants on a journey. The peace of the sanctuary gave rise to
the right of asylum. Finally it was the sanctification of Sunday
which gave rise to the Truce of God, for it had always been
agreed not to do battle on that day and to suspend disputes in
the law-courts.
The Truce of God dates only from the eleventh century. It arose
amid the anarchy of feudalism as a remedy for the powerlessness
of lay authorities to enforce respect for the public peace.
There was then an epidemic of private wars, which made Europe a
battlefield bristling with fortified castles and overrun by
armed bands who respected nothing, not even sanctuaries, clergy,
or consecrated days. A Council of Elne in 1027, in a canon
concerning the sanctification of Sunday, forbade hostilities
from Saturday night until Monday morning. Here may be seen the
germ of the Truce of God. This prohibition was subsequently
extended to the days of the week consecrated by the great
mysteries of Christianity, viz., Thursday, in memory of the
Ascension, Friday, the day of the Passion, and Saturday, the day
of the Resurrection (council 1041). Still another step included
Advent and Lent in the Truce. Efforts were made in this way to
limit the scourge of private war without suppressing it
outright. The penalty was excommunication. The Truce soon spread
from France to Italy and Germany; the oecumenical council of
1179 extended the institution to the whole Church by Canon xxi,
"De treugis servandis", which was inserted in the collection of
canon law (Decretal of Gregory IX, I, tit., "De treuga et
pace"). The problem of the public peace which was the great
desideratum of the Middle Ages was not solved at one stroke, but
at least the impetus was given. Gradually the public
authorities, royalty, the leagues between nobles (Landfrieden),
and the communes followed the impulse and finally restricted war
to international conflicts.
SEMICHON, La paix et la treve de Dieu (Paris 1869); HUBERTI,
Gottes und Landfrieden (Ansbach, 1892).
CH. MOELLER
Otto Truchsess von Waldburg
Otto Truchsess von Waldburg
Cardinal-Bishop of Augsburg (1543-73), b. at Castle Scheer in
Swabia, 26 Feb., 1514; d. at Rome, 2 April, 1573. He studied at
the Universities of Tubingen, Padua, Pavin, and Bologna, and
received his degree of Doctor of Theology at Bologna. At an
early age he received canonries at Trent, Spires, and Augsburg.
In 1541 he became an imperial councillor and when on an embassy
to Rome was made a papal chamberlain. On 10 May, 1543, he was
elected Bishop of Augsburg; in 1544 he was appointed
cardinal-priest of the Title of St. Balbina by Paul III for
settling a long-continued dispute between the emperor and the
pope. The condition of his diocese was mournful: the clergy were
ignorant and depraved, and Protestantism was widespread. He
sought to mend matters by visitations, edicts, synods, and the
improvement of instruction. He founded the University of
Dillingen, now a lyceum, and the ecclesiastical seminary at
Dillingen (1549-55). In 1564 he transferred the management of
these institutions to the Jesuits. In 1549-50 and again in 1555
he took part in the papal elections at Rome. In 1552 his diocese
was devastated by the troops of Maurice of Saxony. He went once
more to Rome in 1559 and was there made the head of the
Inquisition and, in 1562, Cardinal-Bishop of Albang. In 1567 he
held a diocesan synod at Dillingen. From 1568 he lived
altogether at Rome. He was a moral, religious man, of much force
of character, to whom half measures and shiftiness were foreign.
He incurred the hatred of the Protestants for his protest
against the Religious Peace of Augsburg (1555).
BRAUN, Gesch. der Bischofe von Augsburg, III (Augsburg, 1814);
TRUCHSESS, Literae ad Hosium, ed. WEBER (Ratisbon, 1892);
JANSSEN, Hist of the German People, tr. CHRISTIE, VI-IX (London,
1905-8), passim; WEBER, Card. Otto Truchsess in Hist.-pol.
Blatter, CX (Munich, 1892)., 781-96; DUHR, Quellen zu einer
Biogr. des Kard. Otto Truchsess von Waldburg in Hist. Jahrbuch,
VII (Munich, 1886), 177-209, and XX (Munich, 1899), 71-4.
KLEMENS LOeFFLER
St. Trudo
St. Trudo
(TRON, TROND, TRUDON, TRUTJEN, TRUYEN).
Apostle of Hasbein in Brabant; d. 698 (693). Feast 23 November.
He was the son of Blessed Adela of the family of the dukes of
Austrasia. Devoted from his earliest youth to the service of
God, Trudo came to St. Remaclus, Bishop of Liege (Acta SS., I
Sept., 678) and was sent by him to Chlordulph, Bishop of Metz.
Here he received his education at the Church of St. Stephen, to
which he always showed a strong affection and donated his later
foundation. After his ordination he returned to his native
district, preached the Gospel, and built a church at Sarchinium,
on the River Cylindria. It was blessed about 656 by St.
Theodard, Bishop of Liege, in honour of Sts. Quintinus and
Remigius. Disciples gathered about him and in course of time the
abbey arose. The convent for women, established by him at
Odeghem near Bruges, later also bore his name ("Gallia
Christiana", Paris, 1887, V, 281). After death he was buried in
the church erected by himself. A translation of his relics,
together with those of St. Eucherius, Bishop of Orleans, who had
died there in exile in 743, was made in 880 by Bishop France of
Liege. On account of the threatened inroads of the Normans the
relics were later hidden in a subterranean crypt. After the
great conflagration of 1085 they were lost, but again discovered
in 1169, and on 11 Aug. of that year an official recognition and
translation was made by Bishop Rudolph III. On account of these
translations the dates 5 and 12 Aug. and 1 and 2 Sept. are noted
in the martyrologies. The "Analecta Bollandiana" (V, 305) give
an old office of the saint in verse. The life was written by
Donatus, a deacon of Metz, at the order of his bishop, Angibram
(769-91). It was rewritten by Theodoric, Abbot of St-Trond (d.
1107).
BUTLER, Lives of the Saints; WATTENBACH, Geschichtsquellen,
Deutschl., I (Berlin, 1873), 146; HAUCK, Kirchengeschichte
Deutschl., I (Leipzig, 1904), 306; FRIEDRICH, Kirchengeschichte
Deutschl., II (Bamberg, 1869), 347; STADLER, Heiligenlexicon;
Bulletin de la societe d'art et d'histoire du diocese de Lieuve,
XIV (1904), 251; MABILLON, Acta SS. O.S.B., II, 1022.
FRANCIS MERSHMAN
St. Trudpert
St. Trudpert
Missionary in Germany in the seventh century. He is generally
called a Celtic monk from Ireland, but some consider him a
German. According to legend, he went first to Rome in order to
receive from the pope authority for his mission. Returning from
Italy he travelled along the Rhine to the country of the
Alamanni in the Breisgau. A person of rank named Otbert gave him
land for his mission about fifteen miles south of Freiburg in
Baden. Trudpert cleared off the trees and built a cell and a
little church which Bishop Martinus of Constance dedicated to
Sts. Peter and Paul. Here Trudpert led an ascetic and laborious
life. One day when he was asleep he was murdered by one of the
serfs whom Otbert had given him, in revenge for severe tasks
imposed. Otbert gave Trudpert an honourable burial. The
Benedictine Abbey of St. Trudpert was built in the next century
on the spot where Trudpert was buried. The story of his life is
so full of legendary details that no correct judgment can be
formed of Trudpert's era, the kind of work he did, or of its
success. The period when he lived in the Breisgau was formerly
given as 640-643; Baur gives 607 as the year of his death. The
day of his death is 26 April. In 815 his bones were translated
and the first biography of him was written; this biography was
revised in the tenth and thirteenth centuries.
Acta SS., April, III, 424-40; Bibliotheca hagiagr. lat.
(Brussels, 1898-1900), 1205-6; BAUR, Der Todestag es hl.
Trudpert in Freiburger Dioesanar chiv, XI (Freiburg, 1877),
247-52.
KLEMENS LOFFLER
Antonio de Trueba
Antonio de Trueba
Spanish poet and folklorist, b. at Montellana, Biscay, in 1821;
d. at Bilbao, 10 March, 1889. In 1836 he went to Madrid, hoping
to make a livelihood by literary pursuits. To earn his daily
bread he discharged the duties of a clerk in a small commercial
house, but all the while he beguiled his leisure and his moments
of regret by writing little poems and tales redolent of the
yearnings and sympathies of a Basque transplanted to the busy
cosmopolitan centre. Won over to him by the charm of his
writings, Queen Isabella II made him historiographer of the
Biscayan district, and he held this post until her flight in
1868. His popularity was fixed by the appearance of his first
collection of lyrics, the "Libro de los cantares" (Madrid,
1852). Various collections of his tales, especially charming
when they deal with his native region and its people, appeared
in 1859, 1860, and 1866. In his more ambitious attempts at
writing a novel, as in his work dealing with the Cid of history
and legend, he failed signally; he was too conscientiously a
recorder of the past and left his imagination no free play. He
remains an amiable writer of second rank, but no one can read
without sympathy and appreciation his pretty little songs
fragrant with love for the landscape of his northern Spanish
home. He deserves serious notice among the earlier writers who
helped to develop the novel of manners in the Spain of the
nineteenth century.
BLANCO GARCIA, La literature espanola del siglo XIX (Madrid,
1899); FITZMAURICE-KELLY, Hist. of Spanish Literature (London,
1898)
J.D.M. Ford
Trujillo
Trujillo
Diocese comprising the Departments of Lambayeque, Libertad,
Pinra, and the Province of Tumbes, in North-west Peru, formed by
Gregory XIII, 13 April, 1577, as suffragan of Lima, an
arrangement confirmed by Paul V in 1611, when he appointed
Alfonso de Guzman first bishop. The city of Truxillo (8000
inhabitants), formerly very flourishing, was founded in 1535 on
the Rio Muchi in the Valley of Chimu by Gonzalo Pizarro, who
named it after his native place. It is the capital of the
Department of Libertad, so named because Trujillo was the first
Peruvian city to proclaim its independence from Spain. Most of
the houses are but one story high, on account of frequent
earthquakes, the severest of which occurred in 1619, 1759, and
1816. Its university was erected in 1831, a college having been
founded there earlier in 1621. Near the city lie the ruins of
the Gran Chimu, known originally as ChanChan -- Chimu being the
title of the Indian sovereign -- one of the most stupendous
extant monuments of a departed civilization. They extend over
twelve miles north and south, and six miles east and west, and
recall a highly civilized race -- the Muchoen -- which fell
before the Incas. One may still see the ruined palace and
factories, a necropolis, walls nine metres high, and a labyrinth
of houses and pyramidal sepulchres (huacas), the most remarkable
of which are the Toledo, Esperanza, and Obispo, the latter being
500 feet square and 150 high. From these ruins, over
-L-5,500,000 in gold were recovered by the Spaniards. The
Muchoen had reached a high degree of perfection in metal-work
and in the art of decorating pottery, many specimens of the
latter being unsurpassed since the days of early Greece. An
account of the ancient religion has been preserved by Antonio de
la Calancha, Augustinian prior of Trujillo in 1619; the chief
deity was the moon (Si), her temple (Si-an) situated near the
Rio Muchi having had an area of about 42,000 square yards. A
grammar of the native language -- Mochica -- now dead, was
compiled by Padre Fernando de la Carrera (Lima, 1644). Diocesan
statistics: 102 parishes; 350 churches and chapels; 160 priests;
2 boys' colleges; 3 girls' high schools; there are communities
of Franciscans (2), Conceptionists, Carmelites, Poor Clares,
Dominican Tertiaries, and Lazarists, the latter having charge of
the seminary. The Catholic population numbers about 581,000. The
bishop is Mgr. Carlos Garcia Irigoyen, b. at Lima, 6 November,
1857, edited the "Revista catolica", founded "El amigo del
clero", succeeded Mgr. Manuel Jaime Medina, 21 March, 1910.
Mozans, Up the Andes and down the Amazon (New York. 1911);
Feijoo, Relacion de la ciudad de Truxillo (Madrid, 1763);
Markham, The Incas of Peru (London, 1910).
A.A. MACERLEAN
Feast of Trumpets
Feast of Trumpets
The first day of Tishri (October), the seventh month of the
Hebrew year. Two trumpets are mentioned in the Bible, the
shophar and hacocerah. The latter was a long, straight, slender,
silver clarion, liturgically a priestly instrument. The shophar
was made of horn, as we see from its now and then being called
qeren, "horn" (cf. Jos., vi, 5); in fact, in the foregoing
passage, it is designated a "ram's horn", qeren yobel. The
Mishna (Rosh hasshanah, iii, 2) allows the horn of any clean
animal save the cow, and suggests the straight horn of the ibex.
The Feast of Trumpets is ordained in the words: "The seventh
month, on the first day of the month, you shall keep a sabbath,
a memorial, with the sound of trumpets" (Lev., xxiii, 24). The
Hebrew text has: "a memorial of the blast". The Septuagint adds
"of trumpets" (salpiggon), a word which together with keratine
(made of horn) always designates in the Septuagint, shophar and
never the hacocerah. We find the feast also ordained in Numbers,
xxix, 1: The first day also of the seventh month. . .is the day
of the sounding of the trumpets. This text gives us no more
light in the original, where we read only "the day of blast let
it be unto you". Here, too, the Septuagint hemera semasias, "day
of signaling", affords no light. The feast is called by Philo
salpigges, "Trumpets". It would seem, then, that the shophar and
not the hacocerah was in Biblical times used on the feast of the
new moon of Tishri. In Rabbinical ritual the festival has come
to be known as New Year's Day (rosh hasshnah), Day of Memorial
(yom hazzikkaron), and Day of Judgment (yom haddin). The shophar
gives the signal call to solitude and prayer. In preparation for
the great feast, the shophar is sounded morning and evening
excepting Sabbaths, throughout the entire preceeding month of
Elul. According to the Mosaic Law, the special offerings of the
Feast of Trumpets were a bullock, a ram and seven lambs for a
burnt offering; a buck goat for sin offering (Num., xxix, 2, 5;
Lev., xxii, 24, 25).
WALTER DRUM
Saint Trumwin
St. Trumwin
(TRIUMWINI, TRUMUINI).
Died at Whitby, Yorkshire, England, after 686. He was
consecrated by St. Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, as a
missionary bishop among the Picts, and was consequently regarded
later as the first Bishop of Whithorn, in Galloway. When the
Picts reasserted their independence he retired with a few of his
followers to the monastery of Streaneshalch, now Whitby. In 684
he was present at the synod recorded by Bede (IV, 28), known as
the Synod on the Alne, possibly the same as the Synod of
Twyford; and he accompanied King Ecgfrith to Lindisfarne to
persuade St. Cuthbert to accept the bishopric. The one charter
attributed to him is "a clear forgery" (Haddan and Stubbs, III,
166). St. Bede adds that he spent many years of useful labour at
Whitby before he died and was buried in St. Peter's Church
there.
Acta SS., Feb., II; BEDE, Hist. Ecc. Gent. Ang., IV, cc. 12, 26,
and 28; RAINE in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v.; BIRCH, Cartularium
Saxonicum, I (London, 1885); KEMBLE, Codex Diplomaticus (London,
1839-48); HADDAN AND STUBBS, Councils and Documents (Oxford,
1869-78); SEARLE, Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Kings, and Nobles
(Cambridge, 1899).
EDWIN BURTON
Trustee System
Trustee System
I. In the exercise of her inherent right of administering
property, the Church often appoints deputies who are responsible
to herself. Technically, such administrators, whether cleric or
lay, are called the "fabric" of the Church. In very early times
ecclesiastical goods were divided into three or four portions,
and that part set aside for the upkeep of the Church began to
take on the character of a juridical person. The Eleventh
Council of Carthage (can. ii) in 407 requested the civil power
to appoint five executors for ecclesiastical property, and in
the course of time laymen were called on to take their share in
this administration, with the understanding, however, that
everything was to be done in the name and with the approbation
of the Church. A number of early and medieval synods have dealt
with the administration of curators of ecclesiastical property,
e.g. can. vii, Conc. Bracar. (563); can. xxxviii, Conc. Mogunt.
(813); can. x, Conc. Mogunt. (847); can. xxxv, Conc. Nation.
Wirceburg. (1287). The employment of laymen in concert with
clerics as trustees became common all over Christendom. In
England such officials were called churchwardens. They were
generally two in number, one being chosen by the parish priest,
the other by the parishioners, and with them were associated
others called sidesmen. The churchwardens administered the
temporalities of the parish under the supervision of the bishop,
to whom they were responsible. An annual report on the
administration of church property was made obligatory in all
countries by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, can. ix, "De
Ref."): "The administrators, whether ecclesiastical or lay, of
the fabric of any church whatsoever, even though it be a
cathedral, as also of any hospital, confratemity, charitable
institution called mont de piEtE, and of any pious places
whatsoever, shall be bound to give in once a year an account of
their administration to the Ordinary."
II. At the present time, the Church nowhere absolutely forbids
the employment of laymen in the administration of ecclesiastical
property, but endeavours, generally by means of concordats, to
have her own laws and principles carried out on this subject
when laymen are among the trustees. According to the present
discipline, the fabric of the church is distinct from the
foundation of the benefice, and sometimes the fabric, in
addition to the goods destined for the upkeep of divine worship,
possesses also schools and eleemosynary institutions (S.C.C., 27
Apr., 1895, in caus. Bergom.). All lay trustees must be approved
by the bishop, and he retains the right of removing them and of
overseeing the details of their administration. In countries in
which the church organization was entirely swept away in the
troubles of the Reformation period, as in the British Isles,
laymen are not generally employed as trustees at the present
day. For the trustee system, as far as it can be called such, in
use in the Catholic Church in England and Ireland see Taunton,
"The Law of the Church", pp. 15, 316. In Holland, laymen were
admitted to a share in the administration of church
temporalities by a decree of the Propaganda (21 July, 1856). The
bishop is to nominate the members of the board, over which the
parish priest is to preside. Trustees hold office for four years
and may be reappointed at the expiration of that term. When a
vacancy occurs the board presents two names to the bishop, from
which he selects one. In necessary cases the bishop may dismiss
any member and even dissolve the entire board of trustees. In
this instance, as in all others where laymen are in question,
the Holy See is careful to guard the prescriptions of the sacred
canons as to the management and ownership of church goods [see
ADMINISTRATOR (OF ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY)].
III. In the United States the employment of lay trustees was
customary in some parts of the country from a very early period.
Dissensions sometimes arose with the ecclesiastical authorities,
and the Holy See has intervened to restore peace (see CONWELL,
HENRY; PHILADELPHIA, ARCHDIOCESE OF; NEW YORK, ARCHDIOCESE OF).
Pius VII vindicated (24 Aug., 1822) the rights of the Church as
against the pretensions of the trustees, and Gregory XVI
declared (12 Aug., 1841): "We wish all to know that the office
of trustees is entirely dependent upon the authority of the
bishop, and that consequently the trustees can undertake nothing
except with the approval of the ordinary." The Third Plenary
Council of Baltimore (Tit. IX, no.287) laid down certain
regulations concerning trustees: It belongs to the bishop to
judge of the necessity of constituting them, their number and
manner of appointment; their names are to be proposed to the
bishop by the parish rector; the appointment is to be made in
writing and is revocable at the will of the bishop; the trustees
selected should be men who have made their Easter duty, who
contribute to the support of the Church, who send their children
to Catholic schools, and who are not members of prohibited
societies; nothing can be done at a board meeting except by the
consent of the rector who presides; in case of disagreement
between the trustees and the rector, the judgment of the bishop
must be accepted. A decree of the Congregation of the Council
(29 July, 1911) declares that the vesting of the title to church
property in a board of trustees is a preferable legal form, and
that in constituting such boards in the United States, the best
method is that in use in New York, by which the Ordinary, his
vicar-general, the parish priest, and two laymen approved by the
bishop form the corporation (see PROPERTY, ECCLESIASTICAL, IN
THE U.S.).
IV. The legal standing of church trustees according to British
law is treated by Taunton, "The Law of the Church", pp.15, 315.
In the United States the legal rights of trustees vary slightly
in different States, but the following prescriptions (selected
from Scanlan, "The Law of Church and Grave") hold almost
everywhere: When the statute provides that two lay members of
the corporation shall be appointed annually by the committee of
the congregation, the members of the congregation have no right
to elect said two members, and those appointed in the proper
manner are lawful officers. When the election of new trustees is
invalid, the old trustees hold over until there shall have been
a valid election of their successors. The president and
secretary of a church corporation have no authority to make a
promissory note unless authorized by the board of trustees. When
the laws of the organization give control of matters to the
board of trustees, the majority of the members of the church
cannot control the action of the trustees contrary to the uses
and regulations of the church. A court has no authority to
control the exercise of the judgment or discretion of the
officers of a church in the management of its funds so long as
they do not violate its constitutions or by-laws.
Excommunication does not always remove an officer of a church
corporation. The legal rights of a bishop in regard to the
temporalities of a church, where they are not prescribed by the
civil law, must rest, if at all, upon the ecclesiastical law,
which must be determined by evidence. When property is conveyed
to a church having well-known doctrine, faith, and practice, a
majority of the members has not the authority or power, by
reason of a change of religions views, to carry the property
thus designated to a new and different doctrine. The title to
church property is in that part of the congregation which acts
in harmony with the law of the denomination; and the
ecclesiastical laws and principles which were accepted before
the dispute began are the standard for determining which party
is right.
Taunton, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), s. vv. Fabric;
Administration; Ecclesiastical Property; Scanlan, The Law Of
Church and Grave (New York, 1909); Smith, Notes on II Council of
Baltimore (New York, 1874), x; Concilium Plenarium III
Baltimorense (Baltimore, 1886); Wernz, Jus Decretalium, III
(Rome, 1901).
WILLIAM H.W. FANNING
Trusts and Bequests
Trusts and Bequests
A trust has been defined, in its technical sense, as the right
enforceable solely in equity to the beneficial enjoyment of
property of which the legal title is in another (Bispham,
"Equity", p. 68), and as a right of property, real or personal,
held by one party for the benefit of another. (Bouvier, "Law
Dict.", s. v. Trusts.) It implies two interests, one in equity
and one in law -- an individual to hold the legal title, who is
known as the trustee, and another as beneficiary, known as the
cestui que trust. The term "trust" is applied sometimes to the
equitable title, the obligation of the trustee, or the right
which is held in trust. For the creation of a valid trust there
are three essentials: a definite subject matter within the
disposal of the settlor; a lawful definite object to which the
subject matter is to be devoted; clear and unequivocal words or
acts devoting the subject matter to the object of the trust (28
Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, 866, title "Trusts and Trustees"). No
specific words are required in the creation of a trust, but they
must be sufficient to express the present intent to place a
beneficial interest in a specific property in the hands of a
trustee beyond the control of the person or persons who are to
enjoy the benefit thereof. Any property, real, personal, or
equitable, may be the subject of a trust, except in a few cases
where statutes have provided to the contrary.
The English Statute of Frauds, which has been enacted in most of
the United States in some of its provisions, provides that all
trusts of land should be proved and manifested by writing. But
trusts of personal property are not within the statute;
therefore a valid trust of such property may be created
verbally, but transfers of existing trusts must be in writing.
Under the Roman Law trusts were created for the purpose of
empowering certain individuals to inherit property. These trusts
were known as fidei commissa and for their benefit a separate
equitable jurisdiction was established. There has been some
controversy as to whether the English trust is an outcome of the
Roman institution or not. The difference between the two is that
the latter is a means of carrying out substitutions, while the
former separates the ownership and enjoyment of the benefits of
an estate, the fundamental idea at the root of both being much
the same. This system seems to have appeared in England under
the reign of Edward III, for the purpose of avoiding the
Statutes of Mortmain, which had been passed to check the growth
of landed estates in the hands of religious houses. These trusts
were abolished, except as to certain gifts or grants, by the
passage of the Statute of Uses, known as the 27th Henry VIII,
which held that any person entitled to the use of an estate
should have the title to it. This statute has either been
recognized as part of the common law in most of the United
States through judicial interpretation or been enacted by
legislation.
Trusts are either executed or executory, express or implied. In
an executed trust the instrument must be interpreted according
to the rules of law, even though the intention may be defeated.
A court of equity will take jurisdiction for the purpose of
carrying out executory trusts and seeing that the instrument
which purports to fulfil the intention of the settlor really
does so, and will reform conveyances where the intentions of the
settlor have not been clearly set out. An express trust is one
which is created by the direct words of the settlor. Implied
trusts are those which arise when the terms or circumstances do
not specifically express but simply imply a trust. Where the
entire intention of the trust cannot be carried out without
violating some rule of law or public policy, equity will carry
it out as nearly as possible. Constructive trusts arise by a
construction put by a court of equity on the conduct of the
parties. The Statute of Frauds 29th Charles II requires that
declarations of trust of lands should be proved by writing.
WHO MAY BE A TRUSTEE
Any person worthy of confidence and possessed of the power to
hold real or personal property may be a trustee, the sovereign
in England, any of the states of the United States, and perhaps
the Federal Government, a public officer in his private capacity
or the settlor himself; even the beneficiary or cestui que trust
may act as trustee providing there are other beneficiaries
besides himself; so too a corporation may act in this capacity
if not precluded by the terms of its charter. Municipal
corporations have been trustees but the general trend of
authority is to the contrary. Married women may be trustees and,
acting under the direction of the court, an infant, alien, or
lunatic. In cases where no trustee has been named, or for some
reason the office has become vacant, the court will supply the
deficiency rather than allow the trust to fall, it being
inherent in a court of equity to exercise this power, while in
many jurisdictions it has been specifically granted by statute.
As a general rule, the trustee is appointed by the settlor and
provision made for his successors. The settlor may designate
whomsoever he wishes and vest in that person the power to
appoint succeeding trustees, though sometimes the power is
placed with the cestui que trust and sometimes with the settlor.
The number of trustees is governed by the provisions of the
instrument of the trust, but as a general thing the courts look
unfavourably upon single trustees, particularly in the cases of
large estates or those for infants or lunatics.
There is no particular method by which a trustee accepts a
trust. His actions in the matter are usually equivalent to
acceptance, although sometimes he joins in the instrument if it
is a conveyance. There are, however, but three ways by which he
may be relieved: first, the consent of all parties in interest;
second, by virtue of the provisions of the instrument of trust;
and third, with the consent of the court. The old rule in
England forbade a trustee retiring on his own motion, but the
modern rule is different except where it is impossible to
provide a substitute. The conduct sufficient for the removal of
a trustee from his office must be such as to endanger the trust
funds, and the courts will not look favourably upon light or
frivolous whims and disagreements among the parties. The powers
of trustees are general and special -- those which arise by
construction of law incident to the office, and those provided
by the settlor. Any person who has capacity to hold property may
be a cestui que trust, although some jurisdictions restrict the
rule to minors or other incompetents. He must be definitely
ascertained either in person or as a class, but need not be
actually in being at the date of the settlement. A sovereign,
any of the states of the United States, or the Federal
Government may be a beneficiary, or a corporation so far as
personal property is concerned, and also as to real estate
within the limits of its charter privilege or unless prohibited
by statute. An unincorporated society, however, cannot be a
cestui que trust except in the case of a charitable or religious
society. The beneficiary has a right to alienate or encumber his
estate unless the terms of the trust expressly or impliedly
forbid or there is a statute which interferes; so too he may
assign his interest or even alienate the income before it
becomes due.
The cestui que trust or beneficiary has three remedies in the
event of a breach of trust on the part of his trustee. He may
follow the specific estate into the hands of a stranger to whom
it has been wrongfully conveyed; he has the right of attaching
the property into which the estate may have been converted; and
the further right of action against the trustee personally for
reimbursement. As between him and the trustee there is no time
limit when an action may be brought. It is the rule that
purchasers must see to the application of the purchase money in
the cases of trust estates, such as where it is provided that
the funds be for the payment of specific legacies or annuities
or debts. In some jurisdictions this rule has been abrogated by
statute. Technical terms are not necessary in a devise to create
a trust but if used will be interpreted in their legal and
technical sense. General expressions, however, will not
establish a trust unless there appears a positive intention that
they should do so. Bequests in trust for accumulation must be
confined within the limits established against perpetuities. A
settlor can only extend the trust for the life or lives in being
and twenty-one years, and any attempt to extend the trust beyond
this period vitiates it in toto. By statute, accumulations are
forbidden in some jurisdictions excepting during the minority of
the beneficiary or for other fixed periods (Bouvier, "Law
Dict.", s. v. Perpetuity).
As a rule, the interest of a beneficiary is liable for the
payment of his debts, but this does not prevail in a majority of
the United States. Spendthrift trusts, as they are called, being
for the protection of the beneficiary against his own
improvidence, are sustained in these jurisdictions. Since the
Statute of Wills equitable interests are devisable only in
writing. How far a devisee of a trust estate can execute the
trust depends on the intention of the settlor expressed in the
instrument. General words will not pass a trust estate unless
there is a positive intention that it should so pass. In order
to create a valid trust by will, the instrument must be legally
executed and admitted to probate. There is this distinction
between wills and declarations of trusts. The former, being
ambulatory, take effect only on the death of the testator, the
latter at the time of execution. Formerly under the common law
an executor had title to all personal property of the decedent,
and was entitled to take the surplus after the payment of debts
and legacies; now, by statute he is prima facie a trustee for
the next of kin. Although a trustee is, in theory, allowed
nothing for his trouble, his commissions are, in point of fact,
generally fixed by statute and he is allowed his legitimate
expenses. See CHARITABLE BEQUESTS; LEGACIES.
Bouvier, Law Dict. (Boston, 1897); Am. and Eng. Encycl. of Law
(2nd ed., London, 1904); Lewin, On Trusts (l2th ed., London,
1911); Perry, Trusts and Trustees, (6th ed., Boston, 1911);
Bispham, Principles of Equity (Philadelphia, 1882).
WALTER GEORGE SMITH
Truth
Truth
Truth (Anglo-Saxon treow, tryw, truth, preservation of a
compact, from a Teutonic base Trau, to believe) is a relation
which holds (1) between the knower and the known -- Logical
Truth; (2) between the knower and the outward expression which
he gives to his knowledge -- Moral Truth; and (3) between the
thing itself, as it exists, and the idea of it, as conceived by
God -- Ontological Truth. In each case this relation is,
according to the Scholastic theory, one of correspondence,
conformity, or agreement (adoequatio) (St. Thomas, Summa
I:21:2).
I. ONTOLOGICAL TRUTH
Every existing thing is true, in that it is the expression of an
idea which exists in the mind of God, and is, as it were, the
exemplar according to which the thing has been created or
fashioned. Just as human creations -- a cathedral, a painting,
or an epic -- conform to and embody the ideas of architect,
artist, or poet, so, only in a more perfect way, God's creatures
conform to and embody the ideas of Him who gives them being. (Q.
D., De verit., a. 4; Summa 1:16:1.) Things that exist, moreover,
are active as well as passive. They tend not only to develop,
and so to realize more and more perfectly the idea which they
are created to express, but they tend also to reproduce
themselves. Reproduction obtains wherever there is interaction
between different things, for an effect, in so far as it
proceeds from a given cause, must resemble that cause. Now the
cause of knowledge in man is -- ultimately, at any rate -- the
thing that is known. By its activities it causes in man an idea
that is like to the idea embodied in the thing itself. Hence,
things may also be said to be ontologically true in that they
are at once the object and the cause of human knowledge. (Cf.
IDEALISM; and Summa, I:16:7 and 1:16:8; m 1. periherm., 1. III;
Q.D., I, De veritate, a. 4.)
II. LOGICAL TRUTH
A. The Scholastic Theory
To judge that things are what they are is to judge truly. Every
judgment comprises certain ideas which are referred to, or
denied of, reality. But it is not these ideas that are the
objects of our judgment. They are merely the instruments by
means of which we judge. The object about which we judge is
reality itself -- either concrete existing things, their
attributes, and their relations, or else entities the existence
of which is merely conceptual or imaginary, as in drama, poetry,
or fiction, but in any case entities which are real in the sense
that their being is other than our present thought about them.
Reality, therefore, is one thing, and the ideas and judgments by
means of which we think about reality, another; the one
objective, and the other subjective. Yet, diverse as they are,
reality is somehow present to, if not present in consciousness
when we think, and somehow by means of thought the nature of
reality is revealed. This being the case, the only term adequate
to describe the relation that exists between thought and
reality, when our judgments about the latter are true judgments,
would seem to be conformity or correspondence. "Veritas logica
est adaequatio intellectus et rei" (Summa, I:21:2). Whenever
truth is predicable of a judgment, that judgment corresponds to,
or resembles, the reality, the nature or attributes of which it
reveals. Every judgment is, however, as we have said, made up of
ideas, and may be logically analyzed into a subject and a
predicate, which are either united by the copula is, or
disjoined by the expression is not. If the judgment be true,
therefore, these ideas must also be true, i.e. must correspond
with the realities which they signify. As, however, this
objective reference or significance of ideas is not recognized
or asserted except in the judgment, ideas as such are said to be
only "materially" true. It is the judgment alone that is
formally true, since in the judgment alone is a reference to
reality formally made, and truth as such recognized or claimed.
The negative judgment seems at first sight to form an exception
to the general law that truth is correspondence; but this is not
really the case. In the affirmative judgment both subject and
predicate and the union between them, of whatever kind it may
be, are referred to reality; but in the negative judgment
subject and predicate are disjoined, not conjoined. In other
words, in the negative judgment we deny that the predicate has
reality in the particular case to which the subject refers. On
the other hand, all such predicates presumably have reality
somewhere, otherwise we should not talk about them. Either they
are real qualities or real things, or at any rate somebody has
conceived them as real. Consequently the negative judgment, if
true, may also be said to correspond with reality, since both
subject and predicate will be real somewhere, either as
existents or as conceptions. What we deny, in fact, in the
negative judgment is not the reality of the predicate, but the
reality of the conjunction by which subject and predicate are
united in the assertion which we implicitly challenge and
negate. Subject and predicate may both be real, but if our
judgment be true, they will be disjoined, not united in reality.
But what precisely is this reality with which true judgments and
true ideas are said to correspond? It is easy enough to
understand how ideas can correspond with realities that are
themselves conceptual or ideal, but most of the realities that
we know are not of this kind. How, then, can ideas and their
conjunctions or disjunctions, which are psychical in character,
correspond with realities which for the most part are not
psychical but material? To solve this problem we must go back to
ontological truth which, as we saw, implies the creation of the
universe by One Who, in creating it, has expressed therein His
own ideas very much as an architect or an author expresses his
ideas in the things that he creates except that creation in the
latter case supposes already existent material. Our theory of
truth supposes that the universe is built according to definite
and rational plan, and that everything within the universe
expresses or embodies an essential and integral part of that
plan. Whence it follows that just as in a building or in a piece
of sculpture we see the plan or design that is realized therein,
so, in our experience of concrete things, by means of the same
intellectual power, we apprehend the ideas which they embody or
express. The correspondence therefore, in which truth consists
is not a correspondence between ideas and anything material as
such, but between ideas as they exist in our mind and function
in our acts of cognition, and the idea that reality expresses
and embodies -- ideas which have their origin and prototype in
the mind of God.
With regard to judgments of a more abstract or general type, the
working of this view is quite simple. The realities to which
abstract concepts refer have no material existence as such.
There is no such thing, for instance, as action or reaction in
general; nor are there any twos or fours. What we mean when we
say that "action and reaction are equal and opposite", or that
"two and two make four", is that these laws, which in their own
proper nature are ideal, are realized or actualized in the
material universe in which we live; or, in other words, that the
material things we see about us behave in accordance with these
laws, and through their activities manifest them to our minds.
Perceptual judgments, i.e. the judgments which usually accompany
and give expression to acts of perception, differ from the above
in that they refer to objects which are immediately present to
our senses. The realities in this case, therefore, are concrete
existing things. It is, however, rather with the appearance of
such things that our judgment is now concerned than with their
essential nature or inner constitution. Thus, when we predicate
colours, sounds, odours, flavours, hardness or softness, heat or
cold of this or that object, we make no statement about the
nature of such qualities, still less about the nature of the
thing that possesses them. What we assert is
+ that such and such a thing exists, and
+ that it has a certain objective quality, which we call green,
or loud, or sweet, or hard, or hot, to distinguish it from
other qualities -- red, or soft, or bitter, or cold -- with
which it is not identical; while
+ our statement further implies that the same quality will
similarly appear to any normally constituted man, i.e. will
affect his senses in the same way that it affects our own.
Accordingly, if in the real world such a condition of things
obtains -- if, that is to say, the thing in question does exist
and has in fact some peculiar and distinctive property whereby
it affects my senses in a certain peculiar and distinctive way
-- my judgment is true.
The truth of perceptual judgments by no means implies an exact
correspondence between what is perceived and the images, or
sensation -- complexes, whereby we perceive; nor does the
Scholastic theory necessitate any such view. It is not the
image, or sensation-complex, but the idea, that in judgment is
referred to reality, and that gives us knowledge of reality.
Colour and other qualities of objective things are doubtless
perceived by means of sensation of peculiar and distinctive
quality or tone, but no one imagines that this presupposes
similar sensation in the object perceived. It is by means of the
idea of colour and its specific differences that colours are
predicated of objects, not by means of sensations Such an idea
could not arise, indeed, were it not for the sensations which in
perception accompany and condition it; but the idea itself is
not a sensation, nor is it of a sensation. Ideas have their
origin in sensible experience and are indefinable, so far as
immediate experience goes, except by reference to such
experience and by differentiation from experiences in which
other and different properties of objects are presented Granted,
therefore, that differences in what is technically known as the
"quality" of sensation correspond to differences in the
objective properties of things, the truth of perceptual
judgments is assured. No further correspondence is required; for
the correspondence which truth postulates is between idea and
thing, not between sensation and thing. Sensation conditions
knowledge, but as such it is not knowledge. It is, as it were, a
connecting link between the idea and the thing. Differences of
sensation are determined by the causal activity of things; and
from the sensation-complex, or image the idea is derived by an
instinctive and quasi-intuitive act of the mind which we call
abstraction. Thus the idea which the thing unconsciously
expresses finds conscious expression in the act of the knower,
and the vast scheme of relations and laws which are de facto
embodied in the material universe reproduce themselves in the
consciousness of man.
Correspondence between thought and reality, idea and thing, or
knower and known, therefore, turns out in all cases to be of the
very essence of the truth relation. Whence, say the opponents of
our theory, in order to know whether our judgments are true or
not, we must compare them with the realities that are known -- a
comparison that is obviously impossible, since reality can only
be known through the instrumentality of the judgment. This
objection, which is to be found in almost every non-Scholastic
book dealing with the subject, rests upon a grave
misapprehension of the real meaning of the Scholastic doctrine.
Neither St. Thomas nor any other of the great Scholastics ever
asserted that correspondence is the scholastic criterion of
truth. To inquire what truth is, is one question; to ask how we
know that we have judged truly, quite another. Indeed, the
possibility of answering the second is supposed by the mere fact
that the first is put. To be able to define truth, we must first
possess it and know that we possess it, i.e. must be able to
distinguish it from error. We cannot define that which we cannot
distinguish and to some extent isolate. The Scholastic theory
supposes, therefore, that truth has already been distinguished
from error, and proceeds to examine truth with a view to
discovering in what precisely it consists. This standpoint is
epistemologieal, not criteriological. When he says that truth is
correspondence, he is stating what truth is, not by what sign or
mark it can be distinguished from error. By the old Scholastics
the question of the criteria of truth was scarcely touched. They
discussed the criteria of valid reasoning in their treatises on
logic, but for the rest they left the discussion of particular
criteria to the methodology of particular sciences. And rightly
so, for there is really no criterion of universal application.
The distinction of truth and error is at bottom intuitional. We
cannot go on making criteria ad infinitum. Somewhere we must
come to what is ultimate, either first principles or facts.
This is precisely what the Scholastic theory of truth affirms.
In deference to the modern demand for an infallible and
universal criterion of truth, not a few Scholastic writers of
late have suggested objective evidence. Objective evidence,
however, is nothing more than the manifestation of the object
itself, directly or indirectly, to the mind, and hence is not
strictly a criterion of truth, but its foundation. As Pere Geny
puts it in his pamphlet discussing "Une nouvelle theorie de la
connaissance", to state that evidence is the ultimate criterion
of truth is equivalent to stating that knowledge properly so
called has no need of a criterion, since it is absurd to suppose
a knowledge which does not know what it knows. Once grant, as
all must grant who wish to avoid absolute sceptieism, that
knowledge is possible, and it follows that, properly used, our
faculties must be capable of giving us truth. Doubtless,
coherence and harmony with facts are pro tanto signs of truth's
presence in our minds; but what we need for the most part are
not signs of truth, but signs or criteria of error -- not tests
whereby to discover when our faculties have gone right, but
tests whereby to discover when they have gone wrong. Our
judgments will be true, i.e. thought will correspond with its
object, provided that object itself, and not any other cause,
subjective or objective, determines the content of our thought.
What we have to do, therefore, is to take care that our assent
is determined by the evidence with which we are confronted, and
by this alone. With regard to the senses this means that we must
look to it that they are in good condition and that the
circumstances under which we are exercising them are normal;
with regard to the intellect that we must not allow irrelevant
considerations to weigh with us, that we must avoid haste, and,
as far as possible, get rid of bias, prejudice, and an
over-anxious will to believe. If this be done, granted there is
sufficient evidence, true judgments will naturally and
necessarily result. The purpose of argument and discussion, as
of all other processes that lead to knowledge, is precisely that
the object under discussion may manifest itself in its various
relations, either directly or indirectly, to the mind. And the
object as thus manifesting itself is what the Scholastic calls
evidence. It is the object, therefore, which in his view is the
determining cause of truth. All kinds of processes, both mental
and physical, may be necessary to prepare the way for an act of
cognition, but in the last resort such an act must be determined
as to its content by the causal activity of the object, which
makes itself evident by producing in the mind an idea that is
like to the idea of which its own existence is the realization.
B. The Hegelian Theory.
In the Idealism of Hegel and the Absolutism of the Oxford School
(of which Mr. Bradley and Mr. Joachim are the leading
representatives) both reality and truth are essentially one,
essentially an organic whole. Truth, in fact, is but reality qua
thought. It is an intelligent act in which the universe is
thought as a whole of infinite parts or differences, all
organically inter-related and somehow brought to unity. And
because truth is thus organic, each element within it, each
partial truth, is so modified by the others through and through
that apart from them, and again apart from the whole, it is but
a distorted fragment, a mutilated abstraction which in reality
is not truth at all. Consequently, since human truth is always
partial and fragmentary, there is in strictness no such thing as
human truth. For us the truth is ideal, and from it our truths
are so far removed that, to convert them into the truth, they
would have to undergo a change of which we know neither the
measure nor the extent.
The flagrantly sceptical character of this theory is
sufficiently obvious, nor is there any attempt on the part of
its exponents to deny it. Starting with the assumption that to
conceive is "to hold many elements together in a connexion
necessitated by their several contents", and that to be
conceivable is to be "a significant whole", i.e. a whole, "such
that all its constituent elements reciprocally determine one
another's being as contributory features in a single concrete
meaning", Dr. Joachim boldly identifies the true with the
conceivable (Nature of Truth, 66). And since no human intellect
can conceive in this full and magnificent sense, he frankly
admits that no human truth can be more than approximate, and
that to the margin of error which this approximation involves no
limits can be assigned. Human truth draws from absolute or ideal
truth "whatever being and conservability" it possesses (Green,
"Prolegom.", article 77); but it is not, and never can be,
identical with absolute truth, nor yet with any part of it, for
these parts essentially and intrinsically modify one another.
For his definition of human truth, therefore, the Absolutist is
forced back upon the Scholastic doctrine of correspondence.
Human truth represents or corresponds with absolute truth in
proportion as it presents us with this truth as affected by more
or less derangement, or in proportion as it would take more or
less to convert the one into the other (Bradley, "Appearance and
Reality", 363). While, therefore, both theories assign
correspondence as the essential characteristic of human truth,
there is this fundamental difference between them: For the
Scholastic this correspondence, so far as it goes, must be
exact; but for the Absolutist it is necessarily imperfect, so
imperfect, indeed, that "the ultimate truth" of any given
proposition "may quite transform its original meaning"
(Appearance and Reality, 364).
To admit that human truth is essentially representative is
really to admit that conception is something more than the mere
"holding together of many elements in a connexion necessitated
by their several contents". But the fallacy of the "coherence
theory" does not lie so much in this, nor yet in the
identification of the true and the conceivable, as in its
assumption that reality, and therefore truth, is organically
one. The universe is undoubtedly one, in that its parts are
inter-related and inter-dependent; and from this it follows that
we cannot know any part completely unless we know the whole; but
it does not follow that we cannot know any part at all unless we
know the whole. If each part has some sort of being of its own,
then it can be known for what it is, whether we know its
relations to other parts or not; and similarly some of its
relations to other parts can be known without our knowing them
all. Nor is the individuality of the parts of the universe
destroyed by their inter-dependence; rather it is thereby
sustained.
The sole ground which the Hegelian and the Absolutist have for
denying these facts is that they will not square with their
theory that the universe is organically one. Since, therefore,
it is confessedly impossible to explain the nature of this unity
or to show how in it the multitudinous differences of the
universe are "reconciled", and since, further, this theory is
acknowledged to be hopelessly sceptical, it is surely irrational
any longer to maintain it.
C. The Pragmatic Theory
Life for the Pragmatist is essentially practical. All human
activity is purposive, and its purpose is the control of human
experience with a view to its improvement, both in the
individual and in the race. Truth is but a means to this end.
Ideas, hypotheses, and theories are but instruments which man
has "made" in order to better both himself and his environment;
and, though specific in type, like all other forms of human
activity they exist solely for this end, and are "true" in so
far as they fulfil it. Truth is thus a form of value: it is
something that works satisfactorily; something that "ministers
to human interests, purposes and objects of desire" (Studies in
Humanism, 362). There are no axioms or self-evident truths.
Until an idea or a judgment has proved itself of value in the
manipulation of concrete experience, it is but a postulate or
claim to truth. Nor are there any absolute or irreversible
truths. A proposition is true so long as it proves itself
useful, and no longer. In regard to the essential features of
this theory of truth W. James, John Dewey, and A.W. Moore in
America, F.C.S. Schiller in England, G. Simmel in Germany,
Papini in Italy, and Henri Bergson, Le Roy, and Abel Rey in
France are all substantially in agreement. It is, they say, the
only theory which takes account of the psychological processes
by which truth is made, and the only theory which affords a
satisfactory answer to the arguments of the sceptic.
In regard to the first of these claims there can be no doubt
that Pragmatism is based upon a study of truth "in the making".
But the question at issue is not whether interest, purpose,
emotion, and volition do as a matter of fact play a part in the
process of cognition. That is not disputed. The question is
whether, in judging of the validity of a claim to truth, such
considerations ought to have weight. If the aim of all cognitive
acts is to know reality as it is, then clearly judgments are
true only in so far as they satisfy this demand. But this does
not help us in deciding what judgments are true and what are
not, for the truth of a judgment must already be known before
this demand can be satisfled. Similarly with regard to
particular interests and purposes; for though such interests and
purposes may prompt us to seek for knowledge, they will not be
satisfied until we know truly, or at any rate think we know
truly. The satisfaction of our needs, in other words, is
posterior to, and already supposes, the possession of true
knowledge about whatever we wish to use as a means to the
satisfaction of those needs. To act efficiently, we must know
what it is we are acting upon and what will be the effects of
the action contemplated. The truth of our judgments is verified
by their consequences only in those cases where we know that
such consequences should ensue if our judgment be true, and then
act in order to discover whether in reality they will ensue.
Theoretically, and upon Scholastic principles, since whatever is
true is also good, true judgments ought to result in good
consequences. But, apart from the fact that the truth of our
judgment must in many cases be known before we can act upon them
with success, the Pragmatic criterion is too vague and too
variable to be of any practical use. "Good consequences",
"successful operations on reality", "beneficial interaction with
sensible particulars" denote experiences which it is not easy to
recognize or to distinguish from other experiences less good,
less successful, and less beneficial. If we take personal
valuations as our test, these are proverbially unstable; while,
if social valuations alone are admissible, where are they to be
found, and upon what grounds accepted by the individual?
Moreover, when a valuation has been made, how are we to know
that it is accurate? For this, it would seem, further valuations
will be required, and so on ad inflnitum. Distinctively
pragmatic criteria of truth are both impractical and unreliable,
especially the criterion of felt satisfaction, which seems to be
the favourite, for in determining this not only the personal
factor, but the mood of the moment and even physical conditions
play a considerable part. Consequently upon the second head the
claim of the Pragmatist can by no means be allowed. The
Pragmatist theory is not a whit less sceptical than the theory
of the Absolutist, which it seeks to displace. If truth is
relative to purposes and interests, and if these purposes and
interests are, as they are admitted to be, one and all tinged by
personal idiosyncrasy, then what is true for one man will not be
true for another, and what is true now will not be true when a
change takes place either in the interest that has engendered it
or in the circumstances by which it has been verified.
All this the Pragmatist grants, but replies that such truth is
all that man needs and all that he can get. True judgments do
not correspond with reality, nor in true judgments do we know
reality as it is. The function of cognition, in short, is not to
know reality, but to control it. For this reason truth is
identified with its consequences -- theoretical, if the truth be
merely virtual, but in the end practical, particular, concrete.
"Truth means successful operations on reality" (Studies in Hum.,
118). The truth-relation " consists of intervening parts of the
universe which can in every particular case be assigned and
catalogued" (Meaning of Truth, 234). "The chain of workings
which an opinion sets up is the opinion's truth" (Ibid., 235).
Thus, in order to refute the Sceptic, the Pragmatist changes the
nature of truth, redefining it as the definitely experienceable
success which attends the working of certain ideas and
judgments; and in so doing he grants precisely what the Sceptic
seeks to prove, namely, that our cognitive faculties are
incapable of knowing reality as it is. (See PRAGMATISM.)
D. The "New" Realist's Theory
As it is a first principle with both Absolutist and Pragmatist
that reality is changed by the very act in which we know it, so
the negation of this thesis is the root principle of "New"
Realism. In this the "New" Realist is at one with the
Scholastic. Reality does not depend upon experience, nor is it
modified by experience as such. The "New" Realist, however, has
not as yet adopted the correspondence theory of truth. He
regards both knowledge and truth as unique relations which hold
immediately between knower and known, and which are as to their
nature indefinable. "The difference between subjeet and object
of consciousness is not a differenee of quality or substanee,
but a differenee of office or place in a configuration" (Journal
of Phil. Psychol. and Scientific Meth., VII, 396). Reality is
made up of terms and their relations, and truth is just one of
these relations, sui generis, and therefore reeognizable only by
intuition. This account of truth is undoubtedly simple, but
there is at any rate one point whieh it seems altogether to
ignore, viz., the existence of judgments and ideas of which, and
not of the mind as such, the truth-relation is predicable. We
have not on the one hand objects and on the other bare mind; but
on the one hand objects and on the other a mind that by means of
the judgment refers its own ideas to objects -- ideas which as
such, both in regard to their existence and their content,
belong to the mind which judges. What then is the relation that
holds between these ideas and their objects when our judgments
are true, and again when they are false? Surely both logic and
criteriology imply that we know something more about such
judgments than merely that they are different.
Bertrand Russell, who has given in his adhesion to "The Program
and First Platform of Six Realists", drawn up and signed by six
American professors in July, 1910, modifies somewhat the naivete
of their theory of truth. "Every judgment", he says (Philos.
Essays, 181), "is a relation of a mind to several objects, one
of which is a relation. Thus, the judgment, 'Charles I died on
the scaffold', denotes several objects or 'objectives' which are
related in a certain definite way, and the relation is as real
in this case as are the other objectives. The judgment 'Charles
I died in his bed', on the other hand, denotes the objects,
Charles I, death, and bed, and a certain relation between them,
which in this case does not relate the objects as it is supposed
to relate them. A judgment therefore, is true, when the relation
which is one of the objects relates the other objects, otherwise
it is false" (loc. cit.). In this statement of the nature of
truth: correspondenee between the mind judging and the objects
about which we judge is distinctly implied, and it is precisely
this correspondcnce which is set down as the distinguishing mark
of true judgments. Russell however, unfortunately seems to be at
variance with other members of the New Realist school on this
point. G.E. Moore expressly rejects the correspondence theory of
truth ("Mind", N. S., VIII, 179 sq.), and Prichard, another
English Realist, explicitly states that in knowledge there is
nothing between the object and ourselves (Kant's Theory of
Knowledge, 21). Nevertheless, it is matter for rejoicing that in
regard to the main points at issue -- the non-alteration of
reality by acts of cognition, the possibility of knowing it in
some respects without its being known in all, the growth of
knowledge by "accretion", the non-spiritual character of some of
the objects of experience, and the necessity of ascertaining
empirically and not by a priori methods, the degree of unity
which obtains between the various parts of the universe -the
"New" Realist and the Scholastic Realist are substantially in
agreement.
III. MORAL TRUTH, OR VERACITY
Veracity is the correspondence of the outward expression given
to thought with the thought itself. It must not be confused with
verbal truth (veritas locutionis), which is the correspondence
of the outward or verbal expression with the thing that it is
intended to express. The latter supposes on the part of the
speaker not only the intention of speaking truly, but also the
power so to do, i.e. it supposes (1) true knowledge and (2) a
right use of words. Moral truth, on the other hand, exists
whenever the speaker expresses what is in his mind even if de
facto he be mistaken, provided only that he says what he thinks
to be true. This latter condition however, is necessary. Hence a
better definition of moral truth would be "the correspondence of
the outward expression of thought with the thing as conceived by
the speaker". Moral truth, therefore, does not imply true
knowledge. But, though a deviation from moral truth would be
only materially a lie, and hence not blameworthy, unless the use
of words or signs were intentionally incorrect, moral truth does
imply a correct use of words or other signs. A lie therefore, is
an intentional deviation from moral truth, and is defined as a
locutio contra mentem; i.e. it is the outward expression of a
thought which is intentionally diverse from the thing as
conceived by the speaker. It is important to observe, however,
that the expression of the thought, whether by word or by sign,
must in all cases be taken in its context; for both in regard to
words and to signs, custom and circumstances make a considerable
difference with respect to their interprctation. Veracity, or
the habit of speaking the truth, is a virtue; and the obligation
of practising it arises from a twofold source. First, "since man
is a social animal, naturally one man owes to another that
without which human society could not go on. But men could not
live together if they did not believe one another to be speaking
the truth. Hence the virtue of veracity comes to some extent
under the head of justice [rationem debiti]" (St. Thomas, Summa,
II-II:109:3). The second source of the obligation to veracity
arises from the fact that speech is clearly of its very nature
intended for the communication of knowledge by one to another.
It should be used, therefore, for the purpose for which it is
naturally intended, and lies should be avoided. For lies are not
merely a misuse, but an abuse, of the gift of speech, since, by
destroying man's instinctive belief in the veracity of his
neighbour, they tend to destroy the efficacy of that gift.
For Scholasticism see: scholastic treatises on major logic, s.v.
Veritas; Etudes sur la Verite (Paris, 1909); GENY, Une nouvelle
theorie de la connaissance (Tournai, 1909); MIVART, On Truth
(London, 1889); JOHN RICKABY, First Principles af Knowledge;
ROUSSELOT, L'Intellectualisme de St. Thomas (Paris, 1909);
TONQUEDEC, La notion de la verite dans la philosophie nouvelle
in Etudes (1907), CX, 721; CXI, 433; CXII, 68, 335; WALKER,
Theories of Knowledge (2d ed., London, 1911); HOBHOUSE, The
Theory of Knowledge (London, 1906).
Absolutism: BRADLEY, Appearance and Reality (London, 1899);
IDEM, Articles in Mind, N.S., LT, LXXI, LXXII (1904, 1909,
1910); JOACHIM, The Nature af Truth (Oxford, 1906); TAYLOR,
Elements of Metaphysics (London, 1903); Articles in Mind, N.S.,
LVII (1906), and Philos. Rev., XIV, 3.
Pragmatism: BERGSON, L'Evolution Creatrice (7th ed., Paris,
1911); DEWEY, Studies in Logical Theory (Chicago, 1903); JAMES,
Pragmatism (London, 1907); IDEM, The Meaning af Truth (London,
1909); IDEM, Some Problems of Philosophy (London 1911); MOORE,
Pragmatism and Its Critics (Chicago, 191O); ABEL REY, La theorie
de la physique (Paris, 1907); SCHILLER, Axioms as Postulates in
Personal Idealism (London, 1902); IDEM Humanism (London, 1902);
IDEM, Studies in Humanism (London 1907); SIMMEL, Die Philosophie
des Geldes (Leipsig, 1900), iii.
New Realism: Articles in Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and
Scientific Methods (1910, 1911), especially VII, 15 (July 1910);
MOORE, The Nature of Judgment in Mind, VIII; PRICHARD, Kant's
Theory af Knowledge (Oxford, 1910); RUSSELL, Philosophical
Essays (London, 1910); IDEM, Articles in Mind N.S., LX (1906),
and in Proceedings af the Aristotelian Society VII.
LESLIE J. WALKER
Catholic Truth Societies
Catholic Truth Societies
This article will treat of Catholic Truth Societies in the
chronological order of their establishment in various countries.
IN ENGLAND
The Catholic Truth Society has had two periods of existence. It
was initiated by Dr. (afterwards Cardinal) Vaughan when he was
Rector of St. Joseph's Missionary College, and, in the two or
three years of its existence, issued a number of leaflets and
penny books, some of which are still on sale; but when he became
Bishop of Salford, in 1872, the society fell into abeyance and
soon practically ceased to exist. Meanwhile, and quite
independently, the need of cheap, good literature impressed
itself upon some priests and laymen, who raised the sum of
twelve pounds, which was expended in printing some little cards
of prayers for daily use, and for confession and Communion. The
scheme was brought before Dr. Vaughan, who suggested that the
new body should take the name and place of the defunct Catholic
Truth Society. Under that name it was formally established, 5
November, 1884, and the second period of its existence began
under the presidency of Dr. Vaughan, the Rev. W.H. (now
Monsignor) Cologan and Mr. James Britten being appointed
honorary secretaries. At the death of Cardinal Vaughan, the
present Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Bourne, became
president. The aims of the society are: To spread among
Catholics small devotional works; to assist the uneducated poor
to a better knowledge of their religion; to spread among
Protestants information regarding Catholic faith and practice;
and to promote the circulation of good and cheap Catholic
literature. These objects have been steadily kept in view
throughout the society's existence, although its scope has from
time to time been enlarged as necessity has dictated. From them
it will be seen that the aim of the society is not
controversial, as is sometimes supposed. The position of
Catholics in England is such that controversy is unavoidable,
and a certain proportion of the society's publications have been
devoted to the consideration of the Anglican claims and to the
exposure of the fictions assiduously promoted by the less
intelligent and bigoted class of Protestants. But the chief aim
of the society has been the instruction of Catholics by placing
in their hands, at nominal prices, educational and devotional
works. The sale of some of these has been phenomenal: the
"Simple Prayer-book", for example, has reached a circulation of
1,380,000; the little penny books of daily meditation have
reached 114,000; and nearly 200,000 penny copies of the Gospels
have been sold. An account of the literary output of the society
can be ascertained from the list of publications, to be obtained
from the depot, 69 Southwark Bridge Road, London, S.E. Almost
every subject of importance to Catholics is taken up in one or
other of the society's works; and the number is increasing every
month. Already there is an extensive list of books and pamphlets
directed to meet and answer rationalist objections; among them
may be mentioned a series of penny lives of Catholic men of
science, and thirty-nine papers dealing with "The History of
Religions"; of these last an aggregate of about 200,000 copies
have been issued. For younger Catholics a large number of tales,
dealing with the sacraments and other religious subjects, has
been provided at the lowest possible price.
The society is mainly supported by subscriptions, ten shillings
per annum entitling to membership, while ten pounds is a life
subscription. Without these the work could not be carried on,
as, although the officers have always taken their part
gratuitously, the necessary expenses of rent, printing, and
storing could not be defrayed out of the often infinitesimal
profits accruing from the sale of publications. From the first
there has been the heartiest co-operation between clergy and
laity in every branch of the society's work; and the
difficulties often arising from political differences have never
in any way interfered with the work of the society. The society
has the cordial approval and support of the highest
ecclesiastical authorities, and is indulgenced by the Holy See.
The movement has spread to Ireland, Scotland, the United States,
and Australia. In addition to its literary work, for seventeen
years the society held an annual Catholic conference, which
formed an important event in English Catholic life. These
gatherings, always largely attended by representative clergy and
laity, were the occasion of important pronouncements by the
archbishop or by other bishops, and afforded an opportunity for
the elucidation and discussion of matters affecting the work and
welfare of the Church in England. Their success paved the way
for a development by which, from 1910, the society's conference
has been merged in the National Catholic Congress. The important
work of providing reading for blind Catholics has been taken up
by the society, which has established a circulating library of
books of instruction, devotion, and fiction, printed in Braille
type. It has also provided a number of lectures on matters
connected with history and art, illustrated by suitable lantern
slides. A special committee was formed in 1891 to work for the
spiritual welfare of Catholic seamen of all classes, through the
instrumentality of which Catholic seamen's clubs and homes were
opened. The society has also been the starting-point for other
organizations which now have an independent existence -- e.g.
the Catholic Guardians' Association, which has become a centre
of usefulness throughout the country, is the ultimate
development of a local branch of the society, which made the
distribution of literature to the inmates of workhouses and
hospitals part of its work; the Catholic Social Guild took its
rise in connection with one of the society's conferences; and
the Catholic Needlework Guild was initiated by one of its
secretaries. The realization of its importance is already
growing, and the society is doing effective work for the
Catholic Church in England.
IN IRELAND
The Catholic Truth Society of Ireland was organized at the
meeting of the Maynooth-Union in 1899, with the stated purpose
of diffusing "by means of cheap publications sound Catholic
literature in popular form so as to give instruction and
edification in a manner most likely to interest and attract the
general reader", and which would "create a taste for a pure and
wholesome literature, and will also serve as an antidote against
the poison of dangerous or immoral writings". The society has
received the earnest and practical support of the hierarchy and
laity of Ireland, and has devoted its publications to sound
national, historical, and biographical, as well as religious
subjects in order to offset the demoralization of the output of
the sensational press. In the first ten years of its existence
424 penny publications, with a circulation of over five million
copies, were issued. It has also printed a prayer-book and other
works in Gaelic. The annual conferences have brought together
distinguished gatherings, and the addresses made and papers read
at these meetings, printed in "The Catholic Truth Annual", make
a valuable compilation in the interest of the object for which
the society was started. The society has its main office in
Dublin and has over 800 members.
IN AUSTRALIA
The Australian Catholic Truth Society was started in 1904, and
has its headquarters in Melbourne. Its officers have been active
in the dissemination of sound Catholic literature and in the
spreading of publications that were an antidote to works
subversive of faith and morals. On 1 Nov., 1910 the society had
423 annual and 164 life members distributed over the
Commonwealth and New Zealand and had published 679,375
pamphlets. Of its prayer-book 42,016 copies were sold. In 1910
it sent the Rev. Dr. Cleary on a mission around the world to
establish a chain of agents for an international news service.
IN THE UNITED STATES
The International Catholic Truth Society was incorporated in New
York on 24 April, 1900, the particular objects for which it was
formed being: to answer inquiries of persons seeking information
concerning the doctrines of the Catholic Church; to supply
Catholic literature gratis to Catholics and non-Catholics who
make request for the same; to correct erroneous and misleading
statements in reference to Catholic doctrine and morals; to
refute calumnies against the Catholic religion; to secure the
publication of articles promoting a knowledge of Catholic
affairs; to stimulate a desire for higher education among the
Catholic laity, by printing and distributing lists of Catholic
books, and otherwise to encourage the circulation and reading of
standard Catholic literature; to generally assist in the
dissemination of Catholic truth; and to perform other
educational and missionary work. The territory in which its
operations are principally conducted is in the United States of
America and in Canada. The office of the society is in Brooklyn,
the bishop of which diocese is its honorary president, and the
Rev. W. N. McGinnis. S.T.D., its president.
According to the annual report for the year from March, 1910, to
March, 1911, the society had 1005 members, 618 subscribers, and
118 affiliated societies. It had distributed during the year
199,188 pamphlets. A part of its work found to be of special
benefit is the remailing of Catholic papers and magazines to
people in out of the way sections. During the year 11,579 such
families were supplied with 475,000 copies of Catholic weekly
papers and magazines. Catholic items are supplied twice a month
to 31 daily papers in various parts of the United States. In
affiliation with this society, and acting as distributing
centres, 94 Councils of the Knights of Columbus and 24 other
organizations in various localities have been of material
assistance in refuting calumnies against the Catholic religion,
in publishing in the daily press articles that tend to promote a
knowledge of Catholic affairs; in securing the removal of
objectionable textbooks from the public schools, or the
expurgation from the textbooks of false and unjust statements
concerning the Church; and generally assisting in the
dissemination of Catholic truth. The society has established
connections with agencies in fifteen foreign countries.
JAMES BRITTEN THOMAS F. MEEHAN
Tryphon, Respicius, and Nympha
Tryphon, Respicius, and Nympha
Martyrs whose feast is observed in the Latin Church on 10
November. Tryphon is said to have been born at Kampsade in
Phrygia and as a boy took care of geese. During the Decian
persecution he was taken to Nicfa about the year 250 and put to
death in a horrible manner after he had converted the heathen
prefect Licius. Fabulous stories are interwoven with his legend.
He is greatly venerated in the Greek Church which observes his
feast on 1 February. In this Church he is also the patron saint
of gardeners. Many churches were dedicated to him, and the
Eastern Emperor, Leo VI, the Philosopher (d. 912), delivered a
eulogy upon Tryphon. About the year 1005 the monk Theodoric of
Fleury wrote an account of him based upon earlier written
legends; in Theodoric s story Respicius appears as Tryphon s
companion. The relics of both were preserved together with those
of a holy virgin named Nympha, at the Hospital of the Holy Ghost
in Sassia. Nympha was a virgin from Palermo who was put to death
for the Faith at the beginning of the fourth century. According
to other versions of the legend, when the Goths invaded Sicily
she fled from Palermo to the Italian mainland and died in the
sixth century at Savona. The feast of her translation is
observed at Palermo on 19 August. Some believe that there were
two saints of this name. The church of the Hospital of the Holy
Ghost at Rome was a cardinal s title which, together with the
relics of these saints, was transferred in 1566 by Pope Pius V
to the Church of St. Augustine. A Greek text of the life of St.
Tryphon was discovered by Father Franchi de Cavallieri,
Hagio-graphica (Rome, 1908), in the series Studi e Texti, XIX.
The Latin Acts are to be found in Ruinart, Acta Martyrum .
Analecta Bollandiana, XXVII, 7-10, 15; XXVIII, 217.
GABRIEL MEIER
Tschiderer Zu Gleifheim
Johann Nepomuk von Tschiderer zu Gleifheim
Bishop of Trent, b. at Bozen, 15 Feb., 1777; d. at Trent, 3
Dec., 1860. He sprang from a family that had emigrated from the
Grisons to the Tyrol in 1529 and to which the Emperor Ferdinand
III had given a patent of nobility in 1620. Johann Nepomuk was
ordained priest, 27 July, 1800, by Emmanuel Count von Thun,
Bishop of Trent. After spending two years as an assistant
priest, he went for further training to Rome, where he was
appointed notary Apostolic. After his return he took up pastoral
work again in the German part of the Diocese of Trent, and was
later professor of moral and pastoral theology at the episcopal
seminary at Trent. In 1810 he became parish priest at Sarnthal,
and in 1819 at Meran. Wherever he went he gained a lasting
reputation by his zeal and charitableness. In 1826 Prince-Bishop
Luschin appointed him cathedral canon and pro-vicar at Trent; in
1832 Prince-Bishop Galura of Brixen selected him as Bishop of
Heliopolis and Vicar-General for Vorarlberg. In 1834 the Emperor
Francis I nominated him Prince-Bishop of Trent and on 5 May,
1835, he entered upon his office. During the twenty-five years
of his administration he was distinguished for the exercise of
virtue and charity, and for intense zeal in the fulfilment of
the duties of his episcopal office. He was exceedingly simple
and abstinent in his personal habits. On the other hand he loved
splendour when it concerned the decoration of his cathedral, the
procuring of ecclesiastical vestments, and the ornamentation of
the churches. He devoted a considerable part of his revenues to
the building of churches, and to the purchase of good books for
the parsonages and chaplains' houses. His charity to the poor
and sick was carried so far that he was often left without a
penny, because he had given away everything he had. Twice the
cholera raged in his diocese and on these occasions he set his
clergy a shining example of Christian courage. He left his
property to the institution for the deaf and dumb at Trent and
to the seminary for students that he had founded, and that was
named after him the Joanneum. Directly after his death he was
honoured as a saint; the process for his beatification is now in
progress.
Mitteilungen ueber das Leben des . . . J. N. Tschiderer (Bozen,
1876); TAIT, Leben des ehrwuerdigen Dieners Gottes Johann
Nepomuk von Tschiderer. Nach den Prozessakten und beglaubigten
Urkunden (2 vols., Venice, 1904), Ger. tr. SCHLEGEL (Trent,
1908).
JOSEPH LINS
John Nepomuk Tschupick
John Nepomuk Tschupick
A celebrated preacher, b. at Vienna, 7 or 12 April, 1729; d.
there, 20 July, 1784. He entered the Jesuit novitiate on 14
October, 1744, and, shortly after, was appointed professor of
grammar and rhetoric. In 1763 he became preacher at the
cathedral of Vienna, a position which he filled during the
remaining twenty-two years of his life with exceptional
conscientiousness, prudence, and ability. His preaching was very
successful and highly appreciated by Francis I (d. 1765), Maria
Theresa (d. 1780), Joseph II (d. 1790), and the imperial Court.
His sermons were remarkable for clearness and logical thought,
strength and precision of expression, copiousness and skillful
application of Patristic and Biblical texts. The first edition
of his collected sermons was published in ten small volumes with
an index volume (Vienna, 1785-7). This edition was supplemented
by "Neue, bisher ungedruckte, Kanzelreden auf alle Sonn-und
Festtage, wie auch fuer die heilige Fastenzeit" (Vienna,
1798-1803). A new edition of all his sermons was prepared
recently by Johann Hertkens (5 vols., Paderborn, 1898-1903). An
Italian translation was made by Giuseppe Teglio (4 vols., 4th
ed., Milan, 1856).
SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la Compagnie de JEsus, VIII (Brussels,
1898), 261-3.
MICHAEL OTT
Tuam
Tuam
(TUAMENSIS).
The Archdiocese of Tuam, the metropolitan see of Connacht,
extends, roughly speaking, from the Shannon westwards to the
sea, and comprises half of County Galway, and nearly half of
Mayo, with a small portion of south Roscommon. It is
territorially the largest diocese in Ireland, including in
itself about one-fourteenth of the entire area of the country.
At the census of 1901 the Catholic population was 193,768; the
entire non-Catholic population was 4,194. There are several
parishes in which all the inhabitants are Catholics. The
mainland portion of the archdiocese is divided by a chain of
lakes extending from the city of Galway to the Pontoon, near
Foxford, Mayo. The largest of these lakes -- Corrib, Mask, and
Carra -- form a magnificent and continuous watercourse, but are
not connected by navigable rivers or canals. The country east of
these lakes is a great undulating plain, mostly of arable land,
interspersed here and there with bogs and smaller lakes. The
country west of the great lakes is of entirely different
character. It is nearly all rugged and heathery, with ranges of
hills rising steeply from the lakes, especially from the shores
of Lough Mask on one side, and from the shores of the Atlantic
Ocean on the other, forming many lofty peaks with long-drawn
valleys where the streams rushing down widen into deep and
fishful lakes, which, especially in Connemara, attract fishermen
from all parts of the United Kingdom. The population of this
rugged lakeland is sparse and poor, but the scenery very
picturesque, especially towards the west, where the bays of the
ocean penetrate far in between the mountains, as at the
beautiful Killary Bay. This western coast is bordered by many
wind-swept islands, affording a precarious sustenance to the
inhabitants. Of these the chief are the Isles of Aran in Galway
Bay, and farther off, on the north-western coast, Inishark,
Inisboffin, and Inisturk, Clare Island and Achill Island -- all
of which are inhabited and have schools and churches. There are
three priests on the Aran Islands, one on Inisboffin, one on
Clare Island, and three on Achill, which has a population of
about 6000 souls.
The archdiocese comprises seven rural deaneries -- Tuam,
Dunmore, Claremorris, Ballinrobe, Castlebar, Westport, and
Clifden. There are three vicars-general who preside over three
divisions of the archdiocese which from time immemorial have
been historically distinct, that is Galway east of the Corrib;
West Galway, or the Kingdom of Connemara, and the Mayo portion.
There are 143 secular priests, of whom eight are usually
employed in the seminary. There are only two regulars, properly
so called, who reside in the Augustinian monastery of
Ballyhaunis; two priests of the order of St. Camillus have
charge of the hospice for infirm clergy, Moyne Park,
Ballyglunin, Galway, and four secular clergy of a preparatory
college for the African Missions in the Co. Mayo, generously
given for the purpose by Count Blake of Cloughballymore. There
are four houses of the Christian Brothers, and one of the
Brothers of the Christian schools. There are eleven monasteries
of the Third Order Regular of St. Francis, who were formed by
Archbishop MacHale to counteract the efforts of proselytizing
institutions and to teach agriculture to their pupils. Of these
schools the most successful has been the Agriculture College of
Mount Bellew, which is working under the Agricultural
Department. There are three Presentation convents, and ten
convents of the Sisters of Mercy with schools. St. Jarlath's
Diocesan Seminary has more than a hundred resident students.
St. Patrick in Tuam St. Patrick came into the Diocese of Tuam
from Airtech in north-west Roscommon most likely in A.D. 440,
and thence travelled almost due west from Aghamore, where he
founded his first church, on the summit of Croaghpatrick. We
have the names of some twelve churches which he established in
this district; it is expressly stated that he placed bishops
over several of these churches -- at Cella Senes near
Ballyhaunis; at Kilbenin, where he placed St. Benignus; at
Donaghpatrick, which he gave to Bishop Felartus; at Aghagower,
where he placed St. Senach, whom he called Agnus Dei on account
of his meekness. His sojourn for forty days on ynod of Kells
(1152), and the controversy was carried to Rome and finally
decided in their favour. The primates, however, were allowed the
rents of certain church lands in Tuam, but these claims they
afterwards remitted in exchange for lands in the north of
Ireland.
The Archdiocese of Tuam now comprises the territories of five of
those ancient dioceses which at different periods were united to
the original Diocese of Tuam. This original diocese, which may
be taken as corresponding roughly with the modern deanery of
Tuam, comprised the ancient territory known as the Conmaicne of
Dunmore, and also the Ciarraigi of Loch nan-Airneadh, as well as
a portion of Corcamogha and the Sodan territory. When the
O'Conor kings of the twelfth century came to be the chief rulers
of Connacht, and for a time of all Ireland, they resided mostly
at Tuam and sought to control the spiritual as they did the
temporal rulers of their principality. There can be no doubt
that it was the influence of Turlough Mor, then King of Ireland,
which induced the prelates and papal legate at Kells in 1152 to
make his own Diocese of Tuam the archiepiscopal and metropolitan
see of the province. This original See of Tuam was founded about
A.D. 520 by St. Jarlath, son of Loga, the disciple of St. Benin
of Kilbannon, and the preceptor for a time at Cloonfush near
Tuam of St. Brendan the Navigator. The original cathedral known
as Tempull Jarlath stood on the site of the present Protestant
cathedral. After Jarlath's death his remains were enshrined and
preserved in a church built for the purpose and called Tempull
na Scrine, close to the spot on which the Catholic cathedral now
stands. Around this cathedral, which was begun by Dr. Oliver
Kelly in 1826, are grouped in a circle all the other
ecclesiastical buildings -- the college, the Presentation
convent and schools, the Mercy convent and schools of the
Sisters of Mercy, the Christian Brothers' House and schools, and
the recently-erected archiepiscopal residence.
The ancient See of Annaghdown grew out of the monastery founded
by St. Brendan for his sister St. Briga. Its jurisdiction
extended over O'Flaherty's country around Lough Corrib and
comprised in all some seventeen parishes. The see was
independent down to the death of Thomas O'Mellaigh in 1250, when
Archbishop MacFlionn seized and held it with the consent of the
king. For the next 250 years a prolonged and unseemly conflict
was carried on between the archbishops and abbots, the former
declaring that Annahdown had been reduced by the pope and the
king to the rank of a parish church, whilst the abbots stoutly
maintained their independence. In 1484 the wardenship of Galway
was established, and all the parishes on the south and west
around the lake were placed under the warden's quasi-episcopal
jurisdiction, Tuam still retaining eight parishes to the east of
the lake. In 1830 the wardenship was abolished, and the See of
Galway established as a regular episcopal see, suffragan to
Tuam.
The Diocese of Cong included all the parishes subject to the
Abbey of Cong, which was founded by St. Fechin in 626. The
abbots seem to have exercised quasi-episcopal jurisdiction over
nineteen parishes in the Baronies of Ballynahinch, Ross, and
Kilmaine, which for the most part were served by the monks as
vicars under the abbot. In the Synod of Rath Breasail Cong was
counted as one of the five dioceses of Connacht, but there is no
mention of it at the Synod of Kells in 1152. King Rory O'Conor
retired to the abbey for several years and died there.
The Diocese of Mayo like that of Cong had its origin in Mayo
Abbey, founded by St. Colman about 667 for Saxon monks who had
followed him from Lindisfarne. In 1152 it was recognized by the
Synod of Kells as one of the Connacht sees, and mention is made
of the death of Gilla Isu O'Mailin, Bishop of Mayo, in 1184, but
on the death of Bishop Cele O'Duffy in 1209 no successor was
appointed and the see was merged in that of Tuam, probably
through the influence of King Cathal O"Conor and his relative
Archbishop Felix O'Ruadan of Tuam. But bishops of Mayo reappear
from time to time in the annals down to 1579 when Bishop Patrick
O'Healy coming home to take possession of his See of Mayo was
seized with his companion Friar O'Rourke and hanged at
Kilmallock by Drury, the English President of Munster. At one
time Mayo had no fewer than twenty-eight parishes under its
jurisdiction, which extended from the Dalgin River at Kilvine to
Achill Head. At present this is a small rural parish, and the
"City of Mayo" comprises not more than half a dozen houses.
Of the Diocese of Aghagower we need say little. It was founded
in 441 by St. Patrick who placed over it Bishop Senach; the
"Book of Armagh" tells us that bishops dwelt there in the time
of the writer (early part of the ninth century). The
jurisdiction of Aghagower extended over the "Owles", the
territory around Clew Bay, comprising the modern deanery of
Westport. But at an early date these churches were absorbed
first into the Diocese of Mayo and afterwards into that of Tuam.
Monasteries
Besides the great monasteries of Annaghdown, Cong, and Mayo,
there were others in the archdiocese that deserve mention. The
monastery of St. Enda at Killeany in Aran become famous in the
first quarter of the sixth century. Near it was the oratory
Tempull Benain, which Benan, or Benignus, of Kilbannon, the
disciple of St. Patrick, had built. It is very small but
strikingly beautiful, and its cyclopean walls have not lost a
stone for the last fourteen hundred years. There are in addition
to the Aran Island many other holy islands around this wild
western coast, as Island Mac Dara, which all the fishermen
salute by dipping their sails, Cruach of St. Caelainn, Ardilaun
of St. Fechin, St. Colman's Inisboffin, Caher of St. Patrick.
The Cistercian Abbey of Knockmoy (de Colle Victoriae), six miles
from Tuam, founded in 1189 by King Crovedearg, was one of the
largest and the wealthiest in the West of Ireland. Mention, too,
is made of a Bishop of Knockmoy. The ruins are full of interest,
for some of its walls were frescoed and the sculptured tomb of
King Felim O'Conor is well preserved. At its suppression in 1542
it was found to be in the possession of the rectories of several
churches, and large estates in Galway, Roscommon, and Mayo. The
same King Cathal of the Red Hand founded in 1215 the Abbey of
Ballintubber close to St. Patrick's holy well. It was admirably
built and has been partly restored as the parochial church of
the district. It contains the tomb and monument of the first
Viscount Mayo, the son of Sir Richard Burke and Grania Uaile,
Queen of Clew Bay. The Dominican Abbey of Athenry was
established in 1241 by Meyler De Bermingham who endowed it with
ample possessions. It usually contained thirty friars. The
"main" building was erected by Meyler; King Felim O'Conor built
the refectory; Flann O'Flynn built the "Scholar House", for the
friars kept a noted school; Owen O'Heyne built the dormitory;
Con O'Kelly built the "chapter house", and so on with the guest
chamber and the infirmary. In Queen Mary's reign this convent
was selected to be a university college for Connacht, but the
project was never realized. Buried there are many of the early
Burkes of Clanrichard, who in life were benefactors and
protectors of the convent.
The Benedictine Nuns had a convent at Kilereevanty, situated on
the Dalgin River, four miles from Tuam. It was founded in 1200
by the same King Cathal O'Conor for the royal ladies of his
family, and of other high chieftains by whom it was richly
endowed. It held estates not only in Galway but also in
Roscommpon, Mayo, Sligo, and Westmeath, and the rectories of
score of different parishes. Its inmates at one time secured at
Rome a curtailment of the archbishop's rights of visitations and
procurations, but after a short experience, the pope found it
necessary to restore his full rights to the archbishop. It was
however the greatest and wealthiest convent in the West. There
were many smaller religious houses in the archdiocese. The
Augustinians had ten; the Dominicans three; the Franciscans
three or four; the Cistericians two; the Templars one, and there
were also three or four nunneries.
Archbishops
In the long list of the Archbishops of Tuam there are many
illustrious names which can be referred to here only briefly.
+ Hugh O'Hession was present at the Synod of Kells in 1152,
where he received the pallium from the papal legate, and so
became the first Archbishop of Tuam.
+ He died in 1161 and was succeeded by Cathal or Catholicus,
O'Duffy, who reigned for forty years. In 1172 he was present
with his suffragans at the Concil of Cashel, which gave formal
recognition to the claims of Henry II. Later, in 1175, he was
deputed to sign the Treaty of Windsor on behalf of King Rory
O'Conor, by which Rory consented to hold his Kingdom of
Connacht in subjection to the English monarch. O'Duffy was
also present at the Lateran Council in 1179, and in 1201 held
a provincial synod at Tuam under the presidency of the Roman
cardinal. He then retired to the Abbey of Cong where he died
the following summer.
+ His successor, Felix O'Ruadain, who previously had been a
Cistercian, probably at Knockmoy, filled the sea for
thirty-six years. He was a near relative of Rory O'Conor,
which strengthened his great influence in the province. Next
year he convoked a great synod of the province at Tuam in
which it was decreed to unite the termon lands of the
monasteries to their respective bishoprics. Tuam thereby
acquired vast estates in Galway, Mayo, and even Roscommon. The
archbishop also complained that Armagh claimed jurisdiction
over the Diocese of Kilmore and Ardagh, which rightfully
belonged to his province, and also over several parishes in
the Archdiocese of Tuam, to which the primate had no claim. A
composition was effected later, in 1211.
+ In 1258 died Walter De Salerno, an Englishman, who was
appointed by the pope but never got possession of his see.
+ In 1286 Stephen de Fulnurn, who had been justiciary, was
appointed to the See of Tuam, but he resided mostly at
Athlone. There is extant an inventory of his effects which
goes to show that he lived in much state and splendour.
+ William de Bermingham, son of Meyler de Bermingham, Lord of
Carbery, Dunmore, and Athenry, appointed in 1289. He was a
powerful high-handed prelate, but the monks of Athenry and
Annaghdown resisted him successfully.
+ Maurice O'Fihely, called in his own time "Flos Mundi" on
account of his prodigious learning, was consecrated Archbishop
of Tuam by Julius II in 1506, but like Florence Conry in later
times, he never beheld his see.
+ In 1537 Christopher Bodkin, then bishop of Kilmaeduagh, was
appointed archbishop of Tuam by Henry VIII, and it is said
took the Oath of Supremacy. He managed to hold his ground in
Tuam for thirty-five years under Henry VIII, Edward, Mary, and
Elizabeth. Bodkin, thought a temporizing prelate, was always a
Catholic and zealous in the service of his flock. In 1558 he
held a visitation of his diocese, the account of which has
been preserved and gives invaluable information regarding the
state of the archdiocese at that time.
+ Malachy O'Queely was one of the greatest Irish prelates of the
seventeenth century -- a patriot, a reformer, and a scholar;
but he was not a general, and unwisely undertook to command
the Confederate troops in Connacht during the wars of 1642-45.
His forces were attacked unexpectedly during the night by Sir
F. Hamilton near Sligo and the archbishop was slain on the
field.
+ Mention must be made too, of Florence Conry, though he never
took possession of his see. He rendered signal service to
Ireland by the foundation of St. Anthonyh's Convent of
Louvain, whose scholars -- Michael O'Clery, Ward, Fleming,
Colgan, and many others -- did so much for the preservation of
the literature and the language and the history of Ireland
both sacred and profane.
+ John MacHale has a special article in this Encyclopedia.
+ His immediate successor, John MacEvilly, was an indefatigable
and zealous prelate; he found time to write commentaries in
English on practically the whole of the New Testament. He was
born in 1818, died in 1902, and lies buried before the high
altar of Tuam cathedral beside John MacHale.
Moral and Social Condition
The moral state of the archdiocese is very good. Temperance is
making rapid strides amongst all classes of the population.
Grave public crimes of every kind have almost disappeared.
Primary education is now universally diffused even in the
remotest mountain valleys. The Christian Brothers' schools are
remarkably efficient, St. Jarlath's College, Tuam, now holds a
premier place amongst the diocesan colleges of Ireland. The
social condition of the people also has been greatly improved
mainly through he efforts of the Congested Districts Board. They
are better housed and better fed; the land is better tilled, and
much more is derived from the harvest of the seas around the
coast. No part of Ireland suffered more during the famine years
from starvation and proselytism than Connemara and the Island of
Achill. The starving people were bribed during these years by
food and money to go to the Protestant churches and send their
children to the proselytizing schools. If they went they got
food and money. "Silver Monday", as they called it, was the day
fixed for these doles. If they refused to go to the church and
to the school they got nothing; and to their honour it must be
said, that most of them, but not all, preferred starvation to
apostasy. The proselytizers have now completely disappeared, and
have quite enough to do to take care of themselves.
The present archbishop, Most Rev. John Healy, a native of the
Diocese of Elphin, was born in 14 Nov., 1841 at Ballinafad, Co.
Sligo. His early education was received at an excellent
classical school in the town of Sligo whence, at about fifteen
years of age, he proceeded to the diocesan college, in those
days situated at Summerhill near Athlone. On 26 August, 1860, he
entered the class of rhetoric at Maynooth, and just before the
completion of his course was called out by his bishop to be a
professor in the college at Summerhill. Here he was ordained in
Sept., 1867, and continued to teach for over two years. His
missionary experiences were gained in the parish of Ballygar,
near Roscommon, where he was curate for two years, and then at
Grange, Co. Sligo, where he spent seven years. He was then for
one year in charge of a deanery school in the town of Elphin. In
1879, he competed simultaneously for two vacant chairs -- one of
theology and the other of classics -- in the national college of
Maynooth, and had the unique honour conferred on him of being
appointed to both and allowed to make his own choice between
them. He naturally selected the chair of theology, which he
filled till 1883, when he succeeded Dr. Murray, as prefect of
the Dunboyne Establishment. During his tenure of this office,
Dr. Healy acted as editor of the "Irish ecclesiastical Record",
but this was only for a single year, for in 1884 he was
appointed titular Bishop of Maera and Coadjutor Bishop of
Clonfert. Here it may be interesting to note that no less than
five members of Dr. Healy's class in Maynooth wear the episcopal
purple in Irish sees. In 1896, on the death of the saintly Dr.
Duggan, he succeeded to the see of Clonfert. Seven years after,
by papal Brief, dated 13 Feb., 1903, he became Archbishop of
Tuam, and on the following St. Patrick's Day took possession of
his ancient see. On 31 August, 1909, he celebrated the silver
jubilee of his episcopate.
The archbishop is a member of many Irish public bodies notably
of the Agricultural Board, the Senate of the National
University, the Board of Governors of University College,
Galway. He is president of the Catholic Truth society of
Ireland, and a Commissioner for the publication of the Brehon
Laws. He acted on the Royal Commission of 1901 to inquire into
and report on condition of University Education in Ireland. His
principal published works are: "Ireland's Ancient Schools and
Scholars", which has reached a fifth edition; "The Centenary
History of Maynooth College"; "The Record of the Maynooth
Centenary Celebrations"; "The Life and Writings of St. Patrick";
"Irish Essays: Literary and Historical"; "Papers and Addresses",
a jubilee collection of fugitive periodical articles and
reviews.
COLGAN, Acta sanctorum Hiberniae; KNOX, Notes on the Dioceses of
Tuam, etc.; IDEM, Hist. of the County Mayo; HEALY, Ireland's
Ancient Schools and Scholars; Annals of the Four Masters, ed.
O'DONOVAN; BRADY, Episcopal Succession; D'ALTON, History of
Ireland; HARDIMAN, Hist. of Galway; O'CONOR DON, The O'Conors of
Connacht.
JOHN HEALY
School of Tuam
School of Tuam
(Irish, Tuaim da Ghualann, or the "Mound of the two Shoulders").
The School of Tuam was founded by St. Jarlath, and even during
his life (d. c. 540) became a renowned school of piety and
sacred learning, while in the eleventh century it rivalled
Clonmacnoise as a centre of Celtic art. St. Jarlath was trained
for his work by St. Benignus, the successor and coadjutor of St.
Patrick, and under this gentle saint's guidance he founded his
first monastery at Cluainfois, now Cloonfush, about two miles
west from Tuam, and a still shorter distance across the fertile
fields from Benignus's own foundation at Kilbannon. Here at
Cluainfois, according to a widespread tradition, Saints Benignus
and Jarlath and Caillin, another disciple of Benignus,
frequently met together to discuss weighty questions in theology
and Scripture. The fame of this holy retreat brought scholars
from all parts of Ireland, amongst whom were St. Brendan, the
great navigator, who came from Kerry, and St. Colman, the son of
Lenin, who came from Cloyne. One day Brendan in prophetic spirit
told his master that he was to leave Cluainfois and go eastward,
and where the wheel of his chariot should break on the journey
"there you shall build your oratory, for God wills that there
shall be the place of your resurrection, and many shall arise in
glory in the same place along with you". Jarlath did not long
delay in obeying this inspired instruction. He departed from
Cluainfois, and at the place now called Tuam his chariot broke
down, and there on the site of the present Protestant, but
formerly Catholic, cathedral he built his church and monastic
school. And he bade good-bye to Brendan saying, "O holy youth,
it is you should be master and I pupil, but go now with God's
blessing elsewhere", whereupon Brendan returned to his native
Kerry. After the death of St. Jarlath there is little in the
national annals about the School of Tuam. There is reference in
the "Four Masters", under date 776 (recte 781), to the death of
an Abbot of Tuam called Nuada O'Bolcan; and under the same date
in the "Annals of Ulster" to the death of one "Ferdomnach of
Tuaim da Ghualann", to whom no title is given. At the year 969
is set down the death of Eoghan O Cleirigh, "Bishop of
Connacht", but more distinct reference to a Tuam prelate is
found in 1085, when the death of Aedh O Hoisin is recorded. The
"Four Masters" call him Comarb of Jarlath and High Bishop
(Ard-epscoip) of Tuam.
COLGAN, Acta sanctorum Hiberniae (Louvain, 1645); HEALY,
Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars (Dublin, 1908);
Martyrology of Donegal; Annals of Ulster; Annals of the Four
Masters.
JOHN HEALY
University of Tubingen
University of Tuebingen
Located in Wuertemberg; founded by Count Eberhard im Bart on 3
July, 1477, after Pope Sixtus IV had first undertaken by the
Bull of 13 Nov., 1476 to endow the university from the property
of the Church. The imperial confirmation followed on 20 Feb.,
1484. The university had four faculties: theology, law,
medicine, and philosophy, and altogether fourteen
professorships. Among the distinguished professors at the
beginning were the theologians Gabriel Biel, Johannes Heynlin
von Stein (a Lapide), Conrad Summenhart, and the jurist Johannes
Vergenhans (Nauclerus). A distinguished physician was Johannes
Widmann. In the philosophical faculty should be mentioned the
mathematicians Paul Scriptoris and Johannes Stoeffler, and the
Humanists Johannes Reuchlin, Heinrich Bebel, and Melanchthon.
Duke Ulrich of Wuertemberg was deposed in 1519 on account of his
misgovernment of the country, but in 1534 was restored to power
by the Lutheran Landgrave Philip of Hesse. In 1535 Ulrich
introduced the Reformation into the country and university,
notwithstanding the stubborn opposition manifested at the
university, especially by its chancellor Ambrosius Widmann. The
most prominent of the new professors were the theologians
Johannes Brenz, Erhard Schnepf, Jakob Andreae, Jakob Heerbrand,
Andreas and Luke Osiander. Among the other professors were the
jurists Johannes Sichard, Karl Molinaeus (Du Moulin), and
Christopher Besold, the physician Leonhard Fuchs, the
philologists Joachim, Camerarius and Martin Crusius, the
cartographer Philip Apian, and the mathematician and astronomer
Michael Maestlin. To secure capable preachers Duke Ulrich
established the Lutheran seminary, and Duke Christopher founded
the collegium illustre for the training of state officials.
The university, like the country, recovered only slowly from the
injuries inflicted by the Thirty Years' War. At first the old
rigid orthodoxy still prevailed in the theological faculty; but
in the eighteenth century a greater independence of thought
gradually gained ground, especially through the efforts of the
chancellor, Christopher Matthaeus Pfaff, the founder of what is
called the collegiate system. Pietism also was represented in
the theological faculty. Towards the end of the eighteenth
century Christian Gottlieb Storr exerted a profound influence as
a Biblical theologian and the founder of the early Tuebingen
School in opposition to the "Enlightenment' and the theories of
Kant. Among his pupils were, in particular, Friedrich Gottlieb
Suesskind, Johann Friedrich Flatt, and Karl Christian Flatt.
Prominent in the faculty of law were Wolfgang Adam Lauterbach,
Ferdinand Christopher Harpprecht, and Karl Christopher Hofacker,
and in the faculty of medicine, Johann Georg Gmelin, Karl
Friedrich Kielmeyer, and Johann Heinrich Ferdinand Autenrieth.
During this era, marked by the spread of the Wolffian and
Kantian doctrines, the faculty of philosophy had few
distinguished members. The chancellor Lebret, however, ranked
high as a historian, and Bohnenberger as a mathematician.
Towards the close of the eighteenth century the university was
in danger of having the faculties of law and medicine
transferred to the school established at Stuttgart by Duke
Charles Eugene, after whom the new school was named. This loss
was averted, however, by the suppression of the new seat of
learning in 1794.
Two causes led to a great development of the university in the
nineteenth century. First, the Catholic university for
Wuertemberg, which at the beginning of the century had been
established at Ellwangen, was transferred in 1817 to Tuebingen
as a Catholic theological faculty, and a Catholic house of study
called Wilhelmsstift was founded to counterbalance the Lutheran
seminary; second, a faculty of political economy was organized
in 1817 (called the faculty of political science since 1822),
and a faculty of natural sciences in 1863. These changes led to
the erection of new university buildings: the anatomical
building (1832-35); the new aula, intended to replace the old
one dating from 1547 and 1777, and the botanical and chemical
institute (1842-45); the clinical hospital for surgical cases
(1846); the physiological institute (1867); the institute for
pathological anatomy (1873); ophthalmic hospital (1875); medical
hospital (1878-79); the physico-chemical institute (1883-85);
the institute for physics (1888); the new hospital for women
(1888-91), in place of the old one built in 1803; the hospital
for mental diseases (1892-94); the mineralogico-geological and
zoological institute (1902); the institute for chemistry
(1903-07); the new ophthalmological clinic (1907-09). A new
building for the library, housed till now in the castle, is in
course of construction; the library contains 4145 manuscripts
and 513,313 volumes. The regular professors numbered 56 in the
summer term of 1911; honorary and adjunct professors, Dozents,
71; matriculated students, 2118, and non-matriculated persons
permitted to attend the lectures, 145, making a total of 2263.
Since the reign of King Frederick I the university has become
more and more a state institution; its income for 1911 was
439,499 marks ($104,382), while the grant from the State for the
year was 1,366,847 marks ($324,626).
In the Protestant theological faculty the critical view of
theological history held by Ferdinand Christian Baur led to the
founding of the later Tuebingen School, to which belong, besides
the founder, Albert Schwegler, Karl Christian Planck, Albert
Ritschl, Julius Koestlin, Karl Christian Johannes Holsten, Adolf
Hilgenfeld, Karl Weizsaecker and Edward Zeller. Other
distinguished theologians, who were somewhat more positive in
their views, were Johann Tobias Beck, and Christian David
Frederick Palmer. David Frederick Strauss, a follower of Hegel,
wrote his "Life of Jesus" while a tutor at Tuebingen. The
distinguished teachers and scholars of the Catholic theological
faculty are often called the Catholic Tuebingen School. The
characteristic of this school is positive and historical rather
than speculative or philosophical. Above all should be mentioned
the great Catholic theologian of the nineteenth century, Johann
Adam Moehler; further: Johann Sebastian Drey, Johann Baptist
Hirscher, Benedict Welte, Johann Evangelist Kuhn, Karl Joseph
Hefele, Moritz Aberle, Felix Himpel, Franz Quirin Kober, Franz
Xaver Linsenmann, Franz Xaver Funk, Paul Schanz, and Paul
Vetter. Distinguished professors of law were: Karl Georg
Waechter, Karl Friedrich Wilhelm Gerber, Alois Brins, Gustav
Mandry, and Hugo Meyer. Among the noted members of the faculty
of political science were: Robert Mohl, Albert Eberhard
Friedrich Schaeffle, Gustav Ruemelin, Gustav Friedrich
Schoenberg, and Friedrich Julius Neumann. Among the noted
members of the medical faculty were: Victor Bruns, Felix
Niemeyer, Karl Liebermeister, and Johannes Saexinger. In natural
science should he mentioned: Hugo Mohl, Theodore Eimer, and
Lothar Meyer. Of the philosophical faculty should be mentioned
Friedrich Theodor Vischer, writer on aesthetics; the philosopher
Christopher Sigwart; the classical philologists Christian Wals
and Wilhelm Sigismund Teuffel; the Orientalists Julius Mohl,
Georg Heinrich Ewald, and Walter Rudolf Roth; the Germanists
Ludwig Uhland and Heinrich Adalbert Keller; the historians
Julius Weizsaecker and Hermann Alfred Gutschmid; and the
geologist Friedrich August Quenstedt.
KlUepfel and Eifert, Geschichte und Beschreibung der Stadt und
Universitaet Tuebingen (Tuebingen, 1849); KlUepfel, Die
Universitaet Tuebingen in ihrer Vergangenheit und Gegenwart
(Leipzig, 1877); Urkunden zur Geschichte der Universitaet
Tuebingen aus den Jahren 1475-1550 (Tuebingen, 1877);
WeizsAecker, Lehrer und Unterricht an der
evangelisch-theologischen Fakultaet der Universitaet Tuebingen
von der Reformation bis zur Gegenwart (Tuebingen, 1877); Funk,
Die katholische Landesuniversitaet in Ellwangen und ihre
Verlegung nach Tuebingen (Tuebingen, 1877); Sproll, Freiburger
Dioezesanarchiv (1902), 105 sq.; RUemelin, Reden und Aufsaetze,
III (Tuebingen, 1894), 37 sq.; Hermelink, Die theologische
Fakultaet in Tuebingen vor der Reformation 1477-1534 (Tuebingen,
1906); Idem, Die Matrikeln der Universitaet Tuebingen: vol. I,
Die Matrikeln von 1477-1600 (Stuttgart, 1906). For further
bibliography cf. Erman and Horn, Bibliographie der deutschen
Universitaeten, II (Leipzig, 1904), 996 sq.
JOHANNES BAPTIST SAeGMUeLLER
Tubunae
Tubunae
A titular see in Mauretania Caesariensis, according to the
"Gerachia cattolica", or in Numidia according to Battandier,
"Annuaire pontifical catholique" (Paris, 1910), 345. The
official list of the Roman Curia does not mention it. The
confusion is explained by the fact that it was located at the
boundary of the two provinces. Bocking, in his notes to the
"Notitia dignitatum" (Bonn, 1839); 523, and Toulotte ("Greg. de
l'Afrique chret., Mauretanies", Montreuil, 1894, p. 171), speak
of two distinct cities, while Muller ("Notes to Ptolemy", IV,
12, ed. Didot, I, 611) admits only one, and his opinion seems
the more plausible. It was a municipium and also an important
frontier post in command of a praepositus limitis Tubuniensis.
St. Augustine and St. Alypius sojourned there as guests of Count
Boniface (Ep. ccxx). In 479 Huneric exiled thither a large
number of Catholics. Its ruins, known as Tobna, are in the
Department of Constantine, Algeria, at the gates of the Sahara,
west of the Chott el-Hodna, the "Salinae Tubunenses" of the
Romans. They are very extensive, for three successive towns
occupied different sites, under the Romans, the Byzantines, and
the Arabs. Besides the remains of the fortress, the most
remarkable monument is a church now used as a mosque.
Three bishops of Tubunae are known. St. Nemesianus assisted at
the Council of Carthage in 256. St. Cyprian often speaks of him
in his letters, and we have a letter which he wrote to St.
Cyprian in his own name and in the name of those who were
condemned with him to the mines. An inscription testifies to his
cult at Tixter in 360, and the Roman Martyrology mentions him on
10 September. Another bishop was Cresconius, who usurped the see
after quitting the Bulla Regia, and assisted at the Council of
Carthage in 411, where his rival was the Donatist Protasius. A
third, Reparatus, was exiled by Huneric in 484.
TOULOTTE, Geog. de l'Afrique chret., Numidie (Paris, 1894),
318-21; DIEHL, L'Afrique byzantine (Paris, 1896), passim.
S. PETRIDES
Tucson
Tucson
(Tucsonensis).
Suffragan of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe. It comprises the State
of Arizona and the southernmost counties of New Mexico, an
extent of 131,212 sq. miles, most of which is desert land. The
Catholic population is approximately 48,500, mostly Mexicans.
There are 43 priests, 27 parishes, 43 missions, 100 stations, 7
academies, 10 parochial schools, 3 Indian schools, 1 orphanage,
5 hospitals.
Up to 1853, date of the Gadsden purchase, Arizona was part of
the Mexican Diocese of Durango. In 1859 it was annexed by the
Holy See to the Diocese of Santa Fe, made a vicariate Apostolic
in 1868, and erected a diocese by Leo XIII in 1897. The first
vicar Apostolic was the most Rev. J. B. Salpointe, followed by
the Most Rev. P. Bourgade, who both died archbishops of Santa
Fe, the former in 1898, the latter in 1908. They were succeeded
by Bishop Henry Granjon, born in 1863, consecrated in the
cathedral of Baltimore, 17 June, 1900. The mission founded by
French missionaries has remained in charge of priests mostly of
the same nationality, assisted by Franciscan Fathers of the St.
Louis and Cincinnati provinces, who attend principally to the
Indian missions, and by the Sisters of St. Joseph, of Mercy, of
Loretto, of the Blessed Sacrament, of St. Dominic, and of the
Precious Blood. The full-blood Indians in the diocese number
40,000: Apache, Chimehuivi, Hualpai, Maricopa, Mohave, Moqui,
Navajo, Papago Pima, Yava Supai. About 4000 are Catholics. They
were visited by the Spanish missionaries as early as 1539 (Fray
Marcos de Niza), and evangelized in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries by the Franciscans and the Jesuits. Of the
churches then built two remain: Tumacacuri (now partly in
ruins), and San Xavier del Bac, nine miles south of Tucson,
founded by Father Kino, S.J., in 1699, and kept in a perfect
state of preservation by the constant attention and liberal care
of the clergy of Tucson. It is considered the best example of
the Spanish Renaissance mission style north of Mexico, and the
best preserved of all the old mission churches in America. The
buildings have been completely restored (1906-10) by the Bishop
of Tucson. The Papago Indians, in whose midst stands the San
Xavier mission, have received uninterrupted care from the clergy
of Tucson. In 1866 the Rev. J.B. Salpointe founded there a
school, which has since been maintained, with the Sisters of St.
Joseph in charge, by the clergy of Tucson, at the expense of the
parish. That school was the first established in Arizona for the
Indians.
ORTEGA, Historia del Nayarit, Sonora, Sinaloa, y ambas
Californias (Mexico, 1887); Rudo Ensayo, tr. GUITERAS, in Am.
Cath. Hist. Soc., V (Philadelphia, June, 1894), no.2; JOLY,
Histoire de la campagnie de JEsus, V (Paris, 1859), ii;
ARRICIVITA, Cronica serafica del apostolico colegio de
QuerEtaro; SALPOINTE, Soldiers of the Cross (Banning, 1898);
ENGELHARDT, The Franciscans in Arizona (Harbor Springs, 1899);
Diary of Francisco Garces, tr. COUES (New York, 1900).
HENRY GRANJON
Tucuman
Tucuman
(Tucumanensis).
Suffragan to Buenos Aires, erected from the Diocese of Salta on
15 February, 1897, comprises the Province of Tucuman (area 8926
sq. miles; population 325,000), in the north-west of the
Argentine Republic. The first and present bishop, Mgr. Pablo
Padilla y Barana (b. at Jujuy, 25 Jan., 1848), was consecrated
titular Bishop of Pentacomia (17 Dec., 1891), transferred to
Salta, (19 Jan., 1893), and to Tucuman (16 Jan., 1898). The
episcopal city, Tucuman, or San Miguel de Tucuman (population
80,000), is situated on the Rio Dulce, 780 miles north-west of
Buenos Aires, and was founded in 1565 by Diego de Villaruel; a
Jesuit college was opened there in 1586. In 1680 Tucuman
replaced Santiago del Estero as capital of the province. The
Spanish forces were utterly defeated at Tucuman in 1812 by the
Argentinos under Belgrano, whose statue has been erected in the
city to commemorate the victory. One of the most interesting
monuments in Tucuman is Independence Hall, where the Argentine
delegates proclaimed (9 July, 1816) the Rio de la Plata
provinces free from Spanish domination. Of the twenty-seven
members forming this National Congress fifteen were priests (as
were two other delegates who were unavoidably absent, and the
secretary of the assembly, JosE Agustin Molina, later Bishop of
Camaco in partibus and Vicar Apostolic of Salta); two of the
fifteen were afterwards raised to episcopal rank -- JosE
Colombres (Salta) and Justo Santa Maria de Oro (Cuyo). It is to
be noted that the See of Cordoba, founded in 1570, was generally
referred to in the seventeenth century as that of Tucuman
(Cordoba de Tucuman).
On 21 January, 1910, the Province of Catamarca (area 47,531 sq.
miles; population 107,000), which till then had been a vicariate
forane of Tucuman, was erected into a separate see under Mgr.
BernabE Piedrabuena (b. at Tucuman, 10 Nov., 1863; consecrated
titular Bishop of Cestrus and coadjutor to Mgr. Padillo, 31 May,
1908; transferred to Catamarca, 8 Nov., 1910). Before the
separation, Tucuman had 15 parishes, 67 churches and chapels,
and Catamarca 15 parishes, 96 churches and chapels; there were
60 secular priests, assisted by Dominicans, Franciscans, and
Fathers of Our Lady of Lourdes; there was a conciliar seminary
with 3 students of philosophy and 60 rhetoricians; 7 theological
students were studying at Buenos Aires and the Collegio
Pio-Latino, Rome; in addition there were two Catholic colleges
at Tucuman and one at Catamarca; there were communities of the
Hermanas Esclavas, Dominican, Franciscan, Good Shepherd, and
Josephine Sisters. A Catholic daily paper is published at
Tucuman and two Catholic weeklies at Catamarca. A large number
of the parishes have the usual Catholic sodalities and
con-fraternities. Workingmen's circles are established in the
two episcopal cities. Catamarca (San Fernando de Catamarca),
lying 230 miles north-north-west of Cordoba, contains 8000
inhabitants. It was founded in 1680 by Fernando de Mendoza. The
National College, which has a chair of mineralogy, is located in
the old Merced Convent. Most of the inhabitants of the Province
of Catamarca are mestizos, descendants of the Quilene, Cilian,
Andagala, and Guafare Indians. Cholla (a suburb of Catamarca) is
inhabited by Calchaqui Indians, but Spanish is now the only
language spoken.
USSHER, Guia eclesiastica de la Republica Argentina (Buenos
Aires, 1910).
A.A. MACERLEAN
Tudela
Tudela
(TUTELAE, TUTELENSIS).
Diocese in Spain. The episcopal city has a population of 9213.
Tudela was taken from the Moors by Alfonso el Batallador (the
Fighter) in March, 1115, and in 1117 he obtained the Fuero de
Sobrarbe. In 1121 the king gave the mosque and the tithes of
several towns to the prior and ecclesiastical chapter of Tudela
and built the Church of Santa Maria, where a community of Canons
Regular of St. Augustine was established, the ecclesiastical
authority of Tudela being vested in its abbot and prior. In 1238
the priory was raised to the dignity of a deanery, the first
dean being D. Pedro JimEnez and the second D. Lope Arcez de
Alcoz. The latter obtained from Alexander IV in 1258 the ring
and mitre. In the sixteenth century the deans of Tudela obtained
the use of "pontificalia", a favour granted by Julius II to the
dean D. Pedro Villalon de Calcena who had been his chamberlain
and who held the deanship for twenty-seven years. The rivalry
between the deans of Tudela and the bishops of Tarazona and the
dissatisfaction of the kings owing to the fact that until 1749
the appointment of the dean was not subject to the royal
patronage, a fact finally accomplished in 1749, induced the
Council and the Royal Chamber to petition for the erection of
Tudela into a diocese, which was done by Pius VI in the Bull of
27 March, 1783. The first bishop was D. Francisco Ramon de
Larumbe (1784). He was succeeded (1797) by D. Simon de
Casaviella Lopez del Castillo, who during the war of
independence saved Tudela from severe measures of retaliation
ordered by the French general Lefevre. The third bishop was D.
Juan Ramon Santos de Larumbe y Larrayoz (1817), and the fourth
and last D. Ramon Maria Azpetitia Saenz de Santa Maria (1819),
who founded the Seminary of Santa Ana in a former house of the
Jesuits. The seminary was re-established in 1846 in a former
Carmelite convent. The last bishop died at Viana on 30 June,
1844.
The Concordat of 1851 suppressed this diocese, since which time
it has been administered by the bishops of Tarazona on whom the
title of Administrator Apostolic of Tudela has been conferred.
The cathedral dedicated to Nuestra Senora de la Blanca dates
from the end of the twelfth and the beginning of the thirteenth
century. It has a very notable facade. There are in Tudela a
college of the Jesuits, charitable institutions conducted by the
Sisters of Charity: the hospital of Nuestra Senora de Gracia,
founded in the sixteenth century by D. Miguel de Eza; the Real
Casa de Misericordia founded by Dona Maria Hugarte in 1771 and
the "Hospitalillo" for orphan children founded in 1596 by D.
Pedro Ortiz.
MADRAZO, Navarra y Logrono in Espana, sus monumentos y artes:
III (Barcelona, 1886); DE LA FUENTE in Espana sagrada, I
(Madrid, 1866).
RAMON RUIZ AMADO
Tuguegarao
Tuguegarao
(TUGUEGARAONENSIS).
Diocese in the Philippines; situated in the north-eastern
section of the Island of Luzon, and embraces the three civil
Provinces of Cagayan, Isabela, and Nueva Viscaya, and the two
groups of the Batanes and Babuyanes Islands. It was erected on
10 April, 1910, being separated from the ancient Diocese of
Nueva Segovia, erected in 1595. For two hundred years the seat
of the Diocese of Nueva Segovia was located at Lalloc on the
Cagayan River, a city which lies within the present limits of
the new Diocese of Tuguegarao. The history of the Catholic
Church in the Cagayan Valley for the three hundred years
preceding the Spanish-American War is practically the history of
the Spanish Dominican Fathers in this territory. The diocese
counts (1912) 23 native secular priests, two Spanish seculars,
17 Spanish Dominicans and 7 Belgian missionaries. There is a
boys' college in charge of the Dominican Fathers, and a girls'
academy under the direction of the Sisters of St. Paul of
Chartres. The population, which is entirely native, numbers
about 200,000. With the exception of a few thousand Aglipayans
they are all Catholics. The first bishop, the Rt. Rev. Maurice
Patrick Foley, was appointed on 10 September, 1910.
MAURICE FOLEY
Tulancingo
Tulancingo
(De Tulancingo).
Diocese in the Mexican Republic, suffragan of Mexico. Its area
is about 8000 square miles, that is to say, almost that of the
State of Hidalgo, in which the diocese is situated. It comprises
the greater part of the State of Hidalgo, with the exception of
a few parishes situated in the western part, and which belong to
the Archbishopric of Mexico; but in return it has a few parishes
in the State of Vera Cruz. Its population is 641,895 (1910). The
bishop lives in the town of Tulancingo (population, 8000),
although the capital of the state is the important mining town
of Pachuca, situated 7962 feet above the level of the sea, with
a population of about 38,620 inhabitants (1910). The Gospel was
first preached in this territory in the first half of the
sixteenth century by the Franciscan Fathers shortly after their
arrival in Mexico; they then founded a convent at Tulancingo,
whose first guardian was the venerable Father Juan Padilla, who
died from the results of an assault made by the unfaithful
Indians of New Mexico. The Augustinian Fathers also worked in
this region.
On 16 March, 1863, Pius IX made this see suffragan of the
Archbishopric of Mexico. When created, many asked that the
episcopal see be in the city of Huejutla; preference was given,
however, to the city of Tulancingo. This new see was formed from
thirty-eight parishes of the Archbishopric of Mexico, and from
sixteen taken from the Bishopric of Puebla. It has 1 seminary
with 40 students; 39 parochial schools; 5 Catholic colleges, and
about 2352 students; there are 6 Protestant colleges with 255
students, and 6 Protestant churches. The town of Tulancingo
existed long before the conquest; it is said to have been
founded by the Toltecas in A.D. 697 and bore the name of
Tollantzinco. Its most noted building is the cathedral, built in
the beginning of the nineteenth century.
Vera, Catecismo geografico historico estadistico de la igl. mEx.
(Amecameca, 1881).
CAMILLUS CRIVELLI
Louis-Rene Tulasne
Louis-Rene Tulasne
A noted botanist, b. at Azay-le-Rideau, Dept of Indre-et-Loire,
France, 12 Sept., 1815; d. at Hyeres in southern France 22 Dec.,
1885. He studied law at Poitiers, but later turned his attention
to botany and worked until 1842 in company with Auguste de
Saint-Hilaire on the flora of Brazil. He was an assistant
naturalist at the Museum of Natural History at Paris 1842-72;
after this he retired from active work. In 1845 he was elected a
member of the Academy to succeed Adrian de Jussieu. Tulasne was
a very industrious, skilful, and successful investigator. He
published at Paris numerous botanical works, the first appearing
in 1845; he first wrote on the phanerogamia, as for instance, on
the leguminosae of South America, then on the cryptogamia, and
especially on the fungi. He gained a world-wide reputation by
his microscopic study of fungi (the science of mycology),
especially by his investigation of the small parasitic fungi,
researches which threw much light on the obscure and complicated
history of their evolution. In this science he worked in
collaboration with his brother Charles (b. 5 Sept., 1816; from
1843 a physician at Paris; d. at Hyeres, 21 Aug., 1885). The
chief publications issued by the two brothers are: "Fungi
hypogaei" (fol., Paris, 1851), and "Selecta fungorum carpologia"
(3 vols. fol., Paris, 1861-65), a work of the greatest
importance for mycology, particularly on account of the splendid
illustrations in the sixty-one plates. Tulasne wrote numerous
mycological treatises for various periodicals such as the
"Annales des sciences nat."; "Archives du museum"; "Comptes
rendus"; "Botanische Zeitung". He left his botanical library to
the Catholic Institute of Paris. Tulasne openly acknowledged his
desire to glorify God by his scientific labours. Several genuses
of fungi, as well as several species, are named after Tulasne,
as Tulasneinia, Tulasnella.
SACHS, Gesch. der Botanik (Munich, 1875); MAGNUS, Nekrolog in
Berichte der deutschen botanischen Gesellschaft, IV (Berlin,
1887).
J. S. ROMPEL
Tulle
Tulle
(TUTELENSIS).
Diocese comprising the Department of Correze. It was suppressed
by the Concordat of 1802, which joined it to the See of Limoges,
but was theoretically re-established by the Concordat of 1817,
and de facto re-erected by Bulls dated 6 and 31 October, 1822.
It is suffragan of Bourges. According to legends which grew up
in later years around the St. Martial cycle, that saint, who had
been sent by St. Peter to preach, is said to have restored to
life at Tulle the son of the governor, Nerva, and to have
covered the neighbouring country with churches. By some of the
legends St. Martin of Tours is made founder of the Abbey of
Tulle; by others, St. Calmin, Count of Auvergne (seventh
century). Robbed of its possessions by a powerful family, it
recovered them in 930 through the efforts of a member of the
same family, Viscount Adhemar, who left a reputation for
sanctity. St. Odo, Abbot of Cluny, reformed it in the tenth
century. John XXII by a Bull dated 13 August, 1317, raised it to
episcopal rank; but the chapter remained subject to monastic
rule and was not secularized until 1514. Among the bishops of
Tulle were: Hugues Roger, known as Cardinal de Tulle (1342-43),
who was never consecrated, and lived with his brother Clement
VI; Jean Fabri (1370-71), who became cardinal in 1371; Jules
Mascaron, the preacher (1671-79), who was afterwards Bishop of
Agen; LEonard Berteaud, preacher and theologian (1842-78). St.
Rodolphe of Turenne, Archbishop of Bourges, who died in 866
founded, about 855, the Abbey of Beaulieu in the Diocese of
Tulle. The Charterhouse of Glandier dates from 1219; the
Benedictine Abbey of Uzerche was founded between 958 and 991;
Meymac Priory, which became an abbey in 1146, was founded by
Archambaud III, Viscount de Conborn.
Urban II on his way to Limoges from Clermont (1095) passed near
Tulle. St. Anthony of Padua dwelt for a time at Brive, towards
the end of October, 1226; and the pilgrimage to the Grotto of
Brive is the only existing one in France in honour of that
saint. Pierre Roger, who became pope under the name of Clement
VI, was a native of Maumont in the diocese. In 1352 the tiara
was disputed between Jean Birel, general of the Carthusians, who
had been prior of Glandier, and Etienne Aubert, who became pope
under the name Innocent VI, and was a native of
Chateau-des-Monts in the Diocese of Tulle. In 1362 Hugues Roger,
Cardinal of Tulle, brother of Clement VI, refused the tiara; in
1370 Pierre Roger, his nephew, became pope under the name of
Gregory XI. At Tulle and in Bas (Lower) Limousin, every year, on
the vigil of St. John the Baptist, a feast is kept which is
known as le tour de la lunade (the change of the moon); it is a
curious example of the manner in which the Church was able to
sanctify and Christianize many pagan customs. Legend places the
institution of this feast in 1346 or 1348, about the time of the
Black Death. It would seem to have been the result of a vow made
in honour of St. John the Baptist. M. Maximin Deloche has shown
that this legend is baseless; that the worship of the sun
existed in Gaul down to the seventh century, according to the
testimony of St. Eligius, and that the feast of St. John's
Nativity, 24 June, was substituted for the pagan festival of the
summer solstice, so that the tour de la lunade was an old pagan
custom, sanctified by the Church, which changed it to an act of
homage to St. John the Baptist.
Among the saints specially honoured in, or connected with the
diocese, besides those already mentioned, are: St. Fereola,
martyr (date uncertain); St. Martin of Brive, disciple of St.
Martin of Tours, and martyr (fifth century); St. Duminus, hermit
(early sixth century); at Argentat, St. Sacerdos, who was Bishop
of Limoges when he retired into solitude (sixth century); St.
Vincentianus (Viance), hermit (seventh century); St. Liberalis,
Bishop of Embrun, died in 940 at Brive, his native place; St.
Reynier, provost of Beaulieu, died at the beginning of the tenth
century; St. Stephen of Obazine, b. about 1085, founder of the
monastery for men at Obazine, and that for women at Coyroux; St.
Berthold of Malefayde, first general of the Carmelites, and
whose brother Aymeric was Patriarch of Antioch (twelfth
century). Etienne Baluze, the learned historian (1638-1718), was
a native of Tulle, and the missionary Dumoulin Borie (1808-38),
who was martyred in Tonquin, was born in the diocese. The chief
pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre-Dame-de-Belpeuch, at
Camps, dating from the ninth or tenth century;
Notre-Dame-de-Chastre at Bar, dating from the seventeenth
century; Notre-Dame-du-Pont-du-Salut, which goes back to the
seventeenth century; Notre-Dame-du-Roc at Servieres, dating from
1691; Notre-Dame-d'Eygurande, dating from 1720;
Notre-Dame-de-La-Buissiere-Lestard, which was a place of
pilgrimage before the seventeenth century;
Notre-Dame-de-La-Chabanne at Ussel, dates from 1140;
Notre-Dame-de-Pennacorn at Neuvic, dating from the end of the
fifteenth century.
Before the application of the Law of 1901, the Diocese of Tulle
contained Carthusians, Franciscans, Sulpicians, Assumptionists,
Fathers of the Third Order of St. Francis of Assisi, and many
teaching congregations of Brothers. The teaching Sisters of the
Sacred Heart of Mary had their mother-house at Triegnac. The
religious congregations were in charge of 6 nurseries, 2
orphanages for boys, 5 orphanages for girls, 1 Good Shepherd
Home, 1 home for the poor, 15 hospitals or hospices, 10 district
nursing institutions, and 1 lunatic asylum. At the time of the
breach of the Concordat in 1905 the diocese had 318,422
inhabitants, 34 first-class parishes, 255 succursal parishes,
and 71 curacies supported by the State.
Gallia Christiana (nova), II (1720), 661-80, instrum., 203, 320;
Champeval, Le Bas Limousin historique et religieux; GEographie
de la Correze (2 vols., Limoges, 1894, 1899); PoulbriEre,
Histoire du diocese de Tulle (Tulle, 1885); Idem, Dictionnaire
archEologique et historique des paroisses du diocese de Tulle (2
vols., Tulle, 1894-99); Champeval, Cartulaire de l'abbaye
bEnEdictine St-Martin de Tulle (Brive, 1903); Deloche, MEmoire
sur la procession dite de la Lunade et les feux de Saint Jean `a
Tulle in MEmoires de l'AcadEmie des Inscriptions et Belles
Lettres, XXXII (1891); Les principaux sanctuaires consacrEs `a
la Sainte Vierge au diocese de Tulle (2d ed., Tulle, 1886);
Niel, Hist. des Eveques de T. in Bull. de la soc. hist. de la
soc. hist. de la Correze (1880-4).
GEORGES GOYAU
Tunic
Tunic
By tunic is understood in general a vestment shaped like a sack,
which has in the closed upper part only a slit for putting the
garment over the head, and, on the sides, either sleeves or mere
slits through which the arms can be passed. The expressions
under-tunic or over-tunic are used accordingly as the tunic is
employed as an outer vestment or under another. A tunic that
reaches to the feet is called a gown tunic (tunica talaris, Gr.
poderes); a tunic without sleeves or with short sleeves is
called colobium; one which leaves the right shoulder free,
exomis. By tunic (tunicella) is understood in liturgical
language that sacerdotal upper vestment of the subdeacon which
corresponds to the dalmatic of the deacon. According to present
usage the dalmatic and tunic are alike both as regards form and
ornamentation. They also agree in the manner of use as well as
in the fact that the tunic, like the dalmatic, is one of the
essential vestments worn at the pontifical Mass by the bishop.
It is unneccesary here to go into full details, but it will
suffice in regard to form, ornamentation, and use to refer to
what is said under dalmatic. As regards the form, according to
the directions of the "Caeremoniale Episcoporum", the tunic
should be distinguished from the dalmatic by narrower sleeves,
but this is hardly observed even in the pontifical tunic, which
is worn under the dalmatic. The bishop himself puts the tunic on
the newly-ordained subdeacon with the words: "May the Lord
clothe thee with the tunic of joy and the garment of rejoicing.
In the name", etc.
History
According to a letter of Pope Saint Gregory the Great to Bishop
John of Syracuse, the subdiaconal tunic was, for a time,
customary at Rome as early as the sixth century. Gregory however
suppressed it and returned to the older usage. From this time
on, therefore, the Roman subdeacon once more wore the planeta
(chasuble) as the outer garment until, in the ninth century, the
tunic again came into use among them as the outer vestment. As
early as the sixth century subdiaconal tunic was worn in Spian,
which according to the ninth canon of the synod of Braga, was
hardly or not at all distinguishable from the diaconal tunic,
the so-called alb. No notice of a tunic worn by subdeacons has
been preservcd from the pre-Carolingian era in Gaul, yet such a
vestment was undoubtedly in use in France as in Spain. There is
certain proof of its use in the Frankish kingdom at the
beginning of the ninth century, both from the testimony of
Amalar of Metz and from various inventories. About the close of
the year one thousand the tunic was so universally worn by
subdeacons as a liturgical upper vestment that it was briefly
called vestis subdiaconalis or subdiaconale. As early as the
first Roman Ordo the tunic is found as one of the papal
pontifical vestments under the name of dalmatica minor,
dalmatica linea. The Roman deacons also wore it under the
dalmatic, while only the tunic and not the dalmatic was part of
the liturgical dress of the Roman cardinal-priests and
hebdomadal bishops. Outside of Rome also the pontifical
vestments frequently included only the tunic, not tunic and
dalmatic together, or, as was more often the case, the dalmatic
without the tunic. Not until the twelfth century did it become
general for the bishop to wear both vestments at the same time,
that is, the tunic as well as the dalmatic. The granting to
abbots of the privilege of wearing the tunic as well as the
dalmatic, is very seldom mentioned, and even then not until the
second half of the twelfth century. Before this era abbots never
received more than the privilege of wearing the dalmatic. The
acolytes at Rome wore the tunic as early as the ninth century;
in the Frankish kingdom it was probably customary in some places
in the tenth century for acolytes to wear the tunic; it was worn
by acolytes at Farfa towards the close of the tenth century. In
the late Middle Ages the wearing of the tunic by acolytes was a
widespread custom. In the medieval period the tunic was called
by various names. Besides tunica, it also bore the name of
tunicella; dalmatica minor; dalmatica linea, or simply linea;
tunica stricta, or merely stricta; subdiaconale; roccus; alba;
and, especially in Germany subtile.
As to the original form of the vestment, it was at first a tunic
in the shape of a gown with narrow sleeves and without the
vertical ornamental strips (clavi). The material of which it was
made was linen for ordinary occasions, but as early as the
ninth-century inventories silk tunics are mentioned. The
development that the vestment has undergone from the Carolingian
period up to the present time has been in all points similar to
that of the dalmatic; during the course of this development the
distinction between the dalmatic and the tunic steadily
decreased. Silk gradually became the material from which the
tunic was regularly made; It grew continually shorter, and slits
were made in the sides which, by the end of the Middle Ages,
went the length of entire side up to the sleeve. Finally,
outside of Italy, the sleeves were also slit, just as in the
dalmatic which, already in the later Middle Ages, was hardly to
be distinguished from the tunic, especially as in the meantime
the red clavi of the dalmatic had been replaced by another form
of ornamentation, which was also adopted for the tunic. When in
the course of the twelfth century a canon was developed
respecting the liturgical colours, the canon was naturally
authoritative for the tunic as well as for the chasuble and
dalmatic.
In the Middle Ages the use of the tunic at Mass corresponded
throughout to that of the dalmatic consequently discussion of it
here is unnecessary. The ceremony in which the bishop, after the
ordination places the tunic upon the newly-ordained subdeacon
had its origin in the twelfth century, but even in the
thirteenth century it was only customary in isolated cases. It
was not until the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries that the
usage was universally adopted in the rite of ordination of
subdeacons. As to the origin of the subdiaconal tunic it was,
without doubt a copy of the dalmatic, in which the vertical
trimming of the dalmatic was omitted, and the sleeves were made
narrower.
The tunic (stickaphion) worn by the subdeacon in the Oriental
Rites does not correspond to the subdiaconal tunic of Western
Europe, which from the beginning had the fixed character of an
outer tunic, but resembled the alb, even though, according to
present custom, it is no longer exclusively white, but often
coloured.
BOCK, Gesch. Der liturg. Gewaender, II (Bonn, 1866); ROHAULT DE
FLEURY, La messe, VII (Paris, 1888); BRAUN, Die liturgische
Gewandung im Occident und Orient (Freiburg, 1907).
JOSEPH BRAUN
Tunis
Tunis
French protectorate on the northern coast of Africa. About the
twelfth century before Christ Phoenicians settled on the coast
of what is now Tunis and founded colonies there, which soon
attained great economic importance. Among them were: Hippo
Zarytus, Utica, Carthage, Hadrumetum, and Tunes. Ultimately all
these cities were obliged to acknowledge the suzerainty of
Carthage, which ruled a territory almost as extensive as the
present Tunis. The fall of Carthage, b.c. 146, made the Romans
masters of the country, which as the Province of Africa became
one of the granaries of Italy. Numerous ruins of palaces,
temples, Christian churches, amphitheatres, aqueducts, etc.,
which are still to be found, give proof of the high civilization
existing under Roman sway. Christianity also flourished at an
early era. In 439 the country was conquered by the Vandals, and
in 533 Belisarius retook it and made it a part of the Eastern
Empire. The supremacy of Constantinople was not of long
duration. First the Patrician Gregorius, Governor of North
Africa for the Emperor Heraclius, proclaimed his independence.
However, on the incursion of the Arabs from the East, Gregorius
was overthrown in 648 by the Arabian commander Abdallah, who
returned to Egypt with enormous booty. In 670 the Arabs again
entered the country, conquered Biserta, and founded the City of
Kairwan in the region beyond Susa. In 697 they also took the
City of Carthage, up to then successfully defended by the
Eastern Empire, and reduced it to a heap of ruins. Tunis, a town
formerly of small importance, now took the place of Carthage in
commerce and traffic. When the Ommayyad dynasty was overthrown
by the Abbassids, almost all Africa regained independence, and
it was not until 772 that the caliphs again acquired control
over it. Caliph Haroun al Raschid made the vigorous Ibrahim ibn
el Aghlab Governor of Africa, but in 800 Ibrahim threw off the
supremacy of the caliphate. Kairwan remained the capital of the
Aghlabite Kingdom, which embraced Tripoli, Algiers, the greater
part of Tunis, and also the Arabic possessions in Sicily and
Sardinia. The last of the Aghlabite dynasty made Tunis the
capital of the country, and gave the name of the city to the
entire country. In 908 the Aghlabite dynasty was overthrown by
Obeid Allah, founder of the dynasty of the Fatimites, which in
the course of the tenth century conquered the whole of North
Africa. After the conquest of Egypt the Fatimites transferred
the seat of their power to Cairo and gave the regions in Western
Africa in fief to the Zirite family in 972.
From the middle of the twelfth century Tunis was ruled by the
Almohade dynasty, which, weakened by its struggles with the
Christian kingdoms of Spain, was driven out of Tunis in 1206 by
a Berber, Abu Hafs, who founded the dynasty of the Hafsites that
ruled until 1574. In 1240 Eastern Algeria was united to Tunis.
Thus in the course of time the great centralized Arabic Empire
was replaced in North Africa by several independent states, such
as Morocco, Algiers, and Tunis. In this way the strength of
Islam, as contrasted with that of Christian Western Europe, was
weakened, and the Christian countries were now able to prepare
to attack the Mohammedan power. Thus, King St. Louis of France
undertook a crusade against Tunis in 1270 which was
unsuccessful; Louis himself died the same year during the siege
of the City of Tunis. During the last centuries of the medieval
era Tunis was the most flourishing of the North African
countries; the cities of Tunis and Kairwan were centres of
Eastern civilization and learning.
The rule of the Arabic Emirs in Tunis was overthrown by the
Turks. Turkish corsairs led by the Greek renegade Horuk
Barbarossa appeared in the western part of the Mediterranean
about 1510. By gifts they won over the ruler of Tunis, Mulei
Mohammed, who permitted them to make the City of Tunis the base
for their piratical expeditions. In a short time Horuk
Barbarossa gathered a large fleet manned chiefly by Turks, and
became master of the City of Algiers and several towns along the
African coast. His brother, Khair al-Din Barbarossa, increased
these possessions on the coast and sought to give his conquests
permanence by placing them under the suzerainty of the Porte.
When disputes over the succession to the throne arose in the
Hafsite dynasty, Barbarossa skilfully used the opportunity to
overthrow Mulei Hassan and to make himself the ruler of Tunis.
Mulei Hassan appealed to the Emperor Charles V, who responded by
landing near Carthage with a fleet, capturing Tunis and Goletta
in July, 1535, and liberating nearly 20,000 Christian slaves.
Mulei Hassan was restored to power in Tunis as a Spanish vassal,
but was obliged to promise to suppress Christian slavery in his
domain, to grant religious liberty, and to close his ports to
the pirates. As a pledge Spain retained the citadels of Tunis
and Goletta, which it garrisoned. On the way home the Spanish
fleet completed the destruction of Carthage, but failed in an
attack on Algiers. Mulei Hassan, who was hated by his people,
was overthrown in 1542 by his own son Mulei Hamid. When in 1570
the Turks entered Tunis from Algiers Mulei Hamid appealed to
Spain for aid, and as a result Tunis was captured by Don Juan of
Austria in 1573. Jealous of his half-brother, however, King
Philip recalled him and offered no resistance when the Turks
conquered the entire country in 1574. Thus the military
supremacy of the Turks was established in Tunis. The real
masters of the country were the Turkish garrisons, beside whom
the dey, appointed by the Sultan as the possessor of the highest
authority, was a mere shadow. As early as the administration of
the third dey, the bey, Murad, originally an officer to collect
the tribute, gained the chief authority for himself and made it
hereditary in his family.
Like Algiers and Morocco, Tunis developed in this period into a
much dreaded pirate state. The Tunisian galleys sailed along all
the coasts of the Mediterranean, devastating and plundering.
They stopped foreign ships on the open sea and dragged them as
prizes to Tunis, where the cargo would be discharged and the
crew and passengers sold as slaves. For a long time Christian
Western Europe did nothing to put an end to this impudent
piracy. Although the English Admiral Blake in 1665 burned nine
large Tunisian pirate ships in the harbour of Porto Farina, yet,
as the struggle against the pirates was not continued, no
permanent improvement of conditions was attained. At a later
date treaties were made between Tunis and the powers interested
in commerce in the Mediterranean. Venice, Spain, Portugal,
England, Holland, Denmark, and even the United States paid an
annual tribute to Tunis. In return Tunis bound itself not to
attack the ships that sailed under the flag of the treaty-making
powers. For two hundred years Europe endured this nest of
pirates. For Tunis it was a brilliant period in which enormous
treasures accumulated in the country, and during which the
supremacy of the Porte was almost nominal.
The nineteenth century completely altered the situation. Sharp
resolutions against piracy in the Mediterranean were passed by
the Congress of Vienna and England was authorized by the powers
to enforce these resolutions by sending a fleet against the
piratical countries. In 1816 Lord Exmouth, by the bombardment
and partial destruction of the City of Algiers, forced the ruler
of Algiers to put an end to Christian slavery. The terrified Bey
of Tunis also promised to do the same, yet, in spite of this,
Christian ships were repeatedly attacked by Tunisian vessels.
When in 1830 the French began the conquest of Algiers, Tunis at
first aided the Algerian leader Abd el Kader, but in retaliation
the French forced Tunis to suppress piracy completely, to yield
an island on the coast, and to pay a sum of money. Alarmed at
the danger from France, the Porte now sought to form closer
relations with Tunis and to make the country an immediate
Turkish province. These efforts, which were successful at that
date in Tripoli, failed in Tunis on account of the opposition of
French diplomacy. In order to be better able to maintain his
position in regard to the Porte, the Bey Sidi Ahmed (1837-55)
entered into closer relations with France, and even tried to
introduce western reforms; in 1842 he abolished slavery, and in
1846 the slave-trade. Under French and English influence his
cousin Sidi Mohammed (1855-59) introduced liberal legislation
and reorganized the administration. His brother Mohammed
es-Sadok (1859-82) even gave the country a liberal constitution
in 1861, but had to withdraw it owing to the opposition of the
Arabs and Moors. His extravagant tastes forced the bey to borrow
money, thus bringing him into financial dependence on France,
which showed more and more undisguisedly its desire to control
Tunis. However, the Franco-German War (1870-71) forced France to
restrain its hand.
In 1871 the sultan granted the hereditary right to rule
according to primogeniture to the family of the bey and
abandoned all claim to tribute, in return for which the bey
promised not to go to war without the permission of the Porte,
and to enter into no diplomatic negotiations with foreign
powers. France protested against this and would not recognize
the suzerainty of the Porte over Tunis, but could not enforce
its protests. In the years succeeding the foreign element in
Tunis constantly gained in importance, and the Italian
Government, especially, sought to acquire a strong economic
position in the country. France began to fear that she might be
outwitted by Italy in Tunis, so in 1881 she used the
disturbances on the boundary of Algiers and Tunis as a pretext
for military interference. In April, 1881, in spite of the
protests of the bey and the Porte, an army of 30,000 French
soldiers advanced from Algiers into Tunis, and readily overcame
the resistance of the tribes. A French fleet appeared before the
capital, and a squadron landed at Biserta a brigade which
advanced against the City of Tunis from the land side. Unable to
oppose this force, the bey was obliged to sign on 12 May the
Treaty of Kasr el-Said, also called the Bardo Treaty, which
transformed Tunis into a French protectorate. The revolt of the
native tribes against the French was crushed in the years
1881-82. Although at the beginning of the expedition France had
declared that the occupation would only be a temporary one, yet
ever since then the French have remained in the country.
Economically the control by an European power has proved
advantageous to the country. Mohammed es-Sadok was succeeded by
his brother Sidi Ali Pasha (1882-1902), who was followed by his
son Sidi Mohammed.
The regency of Tunis has an area of 45,779 sq. miles and
contained, in 1911, 1,923,217 inhabitants, of whom 1,706,830
were natives, 49,245 Jews, 42,410 French, 107,905 Italians,
12,258 English and Maltese, 1307 Spanish. Politically, Tunis
forms a French protectorate; France represents the country in
foreign relations, makes all the treaties with foreign powers,
decides as to peace and war. In return it protects the bey
against any threatened attack upon his land and guarantees the
state debt. In internal affairs the bey has nominally the
legislative power, but decrees and laws are not valid until they
have received the signature of the resident-general representing
the French Government. The budget is not submitted to the hey
for his approval until it has been discussed by the ministerial
council and examined by the French Government. The
resident-general is the representative of the French Government
at Tunis, and is subordinate to the French minister of foreign
affairs. He unites in his person all the authority of the French
Government, is the official intermediary between the Tunisian
Government and the representatives of foreign powers, is the
presiding officer of the ministerial council, and of all the
higher administration of Tunis. He can veto the actions of the
bey, and in case the bey fails to act he can order the necessary
regulations or open the way for them. The ministerial council
consists of the resident-general, two native ministers, and
seven French ministers; the council settles the most important
matters and especially determines the budget. The two native
ministers direct internal affairs, the administration of justice
for the natives, and the supervision of the landed property of
the natives. The other branches of the administration are
directed by the French ministers. The administration of justice
is a double one: all legal disputes in which Europeans are
concerned are settled by French law; the natives are under
Mohammedan law. As regards the Catholic Church Tunis forms the
Archdiocese of Carthage; cf. also the article LAVIGERIE.
Ashbee, Bibl. of Tunisia (London, 1889); Broadley, Tunis Past
and Present (London, 1882); Tissot, Exploration scientifique de
la Tunisie (Paris, 1884-87); Faucon, La Tunisie avant et depuis
l'occupation franc,aise (Paris, 1893); Fitzner, Die Regentschaft
Tunis (Berlin, 1895); Clain de la Rive, Hist. gEnErale de la
Tunisie (Paris, 1895); Loth, Hist. de la Tunisie (Paris, 1898);
Vivian, Tunisia and the Modern Barbary Pirates (London, 1899);
Oliver and Dubois, La Tunisie (Paris, 1898); Hesse- Wartegg,
Tunis, the Land and the People (2nd ed., London, 1899); Bahar,
Le protectorat tunisien (Paris, 1904); La Tunisie au dEbut du
XXe siecle (Paris, 1904); SchOenfeld, Aus den staaten der
Barbaresken (Berlin, 1902); Schanz, Algerien, Tunisien u.
Tripolitanien (Halle, 1905); Loth, La peuple italien en Tunisie
et en AlgErie (Paris, 1905); Idem, La Tunisie et l'aeuvre du
protectorat franc,ais (Paris, 1907); Babelon, Cagnat and
Reinach, Atlas archEologique de la Tunisie (Paris, 1905-);
Violard, La Tunisie du Nord (Paris, 1906); Sladen, Carthage and
Tunis (London, 1907); Petrie, Tunis, Kairouan and Carthage (New
York, 1909); Reclus, AlgErie et Tunisie (Paris, 1909).; Guadiani
and Thiaucourt, La Tunisie (Paris, 1910); Gept, La Tunisie
Economique (Paris, 1910); Statistique gEnErale (Tunis,
annually); Lecore- Charpentier, L'indicateur tunisien (Tunis,
1899-).
JOSEPH LINS
Tunja
Tunja
(Tunquenensis).
Diocese established in 1880 as a suffragan of Bogota, in the
Republic of Colombia, South America. Its jurisdiction comprises
the territory of the Department of Boyaca, with a Catholic
population in 1911 of 400,000 souls; 145 priests; 153 parishes,
and 159 churches and chapels. The capital of the department and
see of the bishop is the City of Tunja, which before the arrival
of the Spaniards was, under the name of Hunza, the residence of
the zaque, the sovereign of the Muisca Indians. It was founded
on 6 Aug., 1538, by Captain Gonzalo Suarez Rondon, by order of
the conqueror Quesada. Emperor Charles V granted it the title of
city in 1681. The wealth and luxury of its ancient founders can
still be recognized in the coats-of-arms carved over the stone
entrances of its beautiful mansions. Prominent among its public
buildings are: the palace of the bishop, the cathedral, and the
various churches; the monastery of the Dominicans, and the
convent of the Santa Clara nuns. Public instruction in the
Department of Boyaca is under the supervision of the governor of
the department, assisted by a director of public instruction.
There are in the department over 200 primary schools, with about
15,000 pupils of both sexes. Secondary instruction in Tunja is
given at various colleges supported by the department, like the
College of Boyaca and the normal school for women; and at
several Catholic institutions such as the Christian Brothers'
College, the Academy of Tertiary Sisters, and the College of the
Presentation; for the education of the clergy there is the
diocesan seminary. There are also several Catholic schools in
other cities of the department, among them the College of Jesus,
Mary, and Joseph, under the Christian Brothers; the College of
the Presentation, in charge of the Sisters of Charity; the
College of Santa Rosa de Lima; and the College of St. Louis
Gonzaga, in Chiquinquira.
(See COLOMBIA.)
JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE
Tunkers
Tunkers
(German tunken, to dip)
A Protestant sect thus named from its distinctive baptismal
rite. They are also called "Dunkards", "Dunkers", "Brethren",
and "German Baptists". This last appellation designates both
their national origin and doctrinal relationship. In addition to
their admission of the teaching of the Baptists, they hold the
following distinctive beliefs and practices. In the
administration of baptism the candidate is required to kneel in
the water and is dipped forward three times, in recognition of
the three Persons of the Trinity. Communion after the manner of
the primitive church is administered in the evening; it is
preceded by the love-feast or agape, and followed by the kiss of
charity. On certain occasions they also perform the rite of
foot-washing. Their dress is characterized by unusual
simplicity. They refuse to take oaths, to bear arms, and, in so
far as possible, to engage in lawsuits. Their foundation was due
to a desire of restoring primitive Christianity, and dates back
to 1708. In that year their founder Alexander Mack (1679-1735)
received believers' baptism with seven companions at
Schwarzenau, in Westphalia. The little company rapidly made
converts, and congregations were established in Germany,
Holland, and Switzerland. As they were subjected to persecution,
they all emigrated to America between the years 1719 and 1729.
The first families settled at Germantown, Pennsylvania, where a
church was organized in 1723. Shortly after some members, led by
Conrad Beissel who contended that the seventh day ought to be
observed as the Sabbath, seceded and formed the "Seventh Day
Baptists" (German; membership in 1911, 250). The Tunkers,
nevertheless, prospered and, in spite of set-backs caused by the
Revolutionary and Civil Wars, spread from Pennsylvania to many
other states of the Union, and to Canada. Foreign missionary
work and the foundation of educational institutions were
inaugurated in the decade 1870-1880. About the same time the
demands for the adoption of a more progressive and liberal
church policy became more and more insistent, and in 1881-82 led
to division. Two extreme parties, "the Progressives" and the
"Old Order Brethren", separated from the main body, which
henceforth was known as the "Conservative Tunkers". These obey
the annual conference as the central authority, and have a
ministry composed of bishops or elders, ministers, and deacons.
They maintain schools in various states, own a printing plant at
Elgin, Illinois, and publish the "Gospel Messenger" as their
official organ. (Membership, 3006 ministers, 880 churches,
100,000 communicants.) The Progressives hold that the decisions
of the annual conference do not bind the individual conscience,
that its regulations concerning plain attire need not be
observed, and that each congregation shall independently
administer its own affairs. (Statistics, 186 ministers, 219
churches, 18,607 communicants.) The Old Order Brethren are
unalterably attached to the old practices; they are opposed to
high schools, Sunday schools, and missionary activity; they have
still, according to the long prevalent custom of the sect, an
unsalaried ministry and are extremely plain in dress. (228
ministers; 75 churches; 4000 communicants.)
The statistics throughout are those of CARROLL in Christian
Advocate (New York, 26 Jan., 1911). Beside the minutes of the
Annual Meeting, consult on the doctrine: MACK, A Plain View of
the Rites and Ordinances of the House of God (Mt. Morris, 1888),
and MILLER, Doctrine of the Brethren Defended (Indianapolis,
1876); BRUMBAUGH, History of the German Baptist Brethren in
Europe and America (Elgin, 1899); FALKENSTEIN, History of the
German Baptist Brethren Church (Lancaster, 1901); HOLSINGER,
History of the Tunkers and the Brethren Churches (Oakland,
1901); GILLEN, The Dunkers (New York, 1906).
N.A. WEBER
Cuthbert Tunstall
Cuthbert Tunstall
Bishop of London, later of Durham, b. at Hackforth, Yorkshire,
in 1474; d. at Lambeth Palace, 18 Nov., 1559. He studied both at
Oxford and Cambridge, finally graduating LL.D. at Padua. Being
an accomplished scholar both in theology and law, as well as in
Greek and Hebrew, he soon won the friendship of Archbishop
Warham, who on 25 Aug., 1511, made him his chancellor, and
shortly after rector of Harrow-on-the-Hill. He became
successively a canon of Lincoln (1514) and archdeacon of Chester
(1515). He began his diplomatic career as ambassador at
Brussels, in conjunction with Sir Thomas More, and there he
lodged with Erasmus, becoming the intimate friend of both of
them. Further preferments and embassies fell to his lot, till in
1522 he was appointed Bishop of London by papal provision. On 25
May, 1523, he became keeper of the privy seal; but neither the
work this entailed nor fresh embassies prevented him from making
a visitation of his diocese. A visit to Worms (1520-1) had
opened his eyes to the dangers of the Lutheran movement and the
evils arising from heretical literature. In the divorce question
Tunstall acted as one of Queen Katherine's counsel, but he
endeavoured to dissuade her from appealing to Rome. On 21 Feb.,
1529-30, he was translated by the pope from the Diocese of
London to the more important See of Durham, a step which
involved the assumption of quasi-regal power and authority
within the bishopric (see DURHAM, ANCIENT CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF).
During the troubled years that followed, Tunstall was far from
imitating the constancy of [St. John] Fisher and [St. Thomas]
More, yet he ever held to Catholic doctrine and practices. He
adopted a policy of passive obedience and acquiescence in many
matters with which he could have had no sympathy. With regard to
the suppression of the monasteries, the king's ministers so
feared his influence that they prevented his attendance at
Parliament.
In 1537 Tunstall was given the onerous position of President of
the Council of the North, and Scottish affairs occupied much of
his attention. Towards the end of Henry's reign he twice was
sent on diplomatic business to France. Under the protectorate of
Somerset his religious position became very difficult, but he
yielded so far in compliance to the new changes that Gardiner
protested. But the lengths to which the reformers went opened
his eyes to the real significance of the royal supremacy; a
change came over his attitude, and he staunchly maintained the
Catholic side, steadily opposing the abolition of chantries, the
Act of Uniformity, and the law permitting priests to marry. He
seems to have hoped that Warwick might be induced to reverse the
anti-Catholic policy of Somerset, but this hope soon failed, and
in 1551 he was summoned to London and confined to his house
there. During this captivity he composed his treatise, "De
Veritate Corporis et Sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi in
Eucharistia", published at Paris in 1554. At the end of 1551 he
was removed to the Tower, and a bill for his deprivation was
introduced. When this failed, he was tried by a commission (4-5
Oct., 1552) and deprived of his bishopric. On Mary's accession
he was liberated, and his bishopric, which had been dissolved by
Act of Parliament in March, 1553, was re- established by a
further Act in April, 1554. Through Mary's reign he, being now
an octogenarian, ruled his diocese in peace, taking little part
either in public affairs or in the persecution of heretics; but
on the accession of Elizabeth his firmness in resisting the
fresh innovations marked him out for the royal displeasure. He
declined to take the oath of supremacy, was summoned to London,
and when ordered to consecrate Parker refused to do so. Shortly
afterwards he was deprived of his see (28 Sept., 1559) and
committed to Parker's care as a prisoner at Lambeth Palace,
where within a few weeks he died. He thus became one of the
eleven confessor-bishops who died prisoners for the Faith.
His works, exclusive of published letters and sermons, are: "De
Arte Supputandi Libri IV" (London, 1522); "Confutatio
cavillationum quibus SS. Eucharistiae Sacramentum ab impiis
Caphernaitis impeti solet" (Paris, 1552); "De veritate Corporis
et Sanguinis Domini in Eucharistia Libri II" (Paris, 1554);
"Compendium in decem libros ethicorum Aristotelis" (Paris,
1554); "Certaine godly and devout prayers made in Latin by C.
Tunstall and translated into Englishe by Thomas Paynelle,
Clerke" (London, 1558). Much of his political correspondence is
preserved in the British Museum. Despite his weakness under
Henry VIII, we may endorse the verdict of the Anglican
historian, Pollard, who writes (op. cit. inf.): "Tunstall's long
career of eighty-five years, for thirty-seven of which he was a
bishop, is one of the most consistent and honourable in the
sixteenth century. The extent of the religious revolution under
Edward VI caused him to reverse his views on the royal supremacy
and he refused to change them again under Elizabeth."
The State Papers, domestic and foreign, for the reigns of Henry
VIII, Edward VI, and Mary, and the usual sources of information
for those reigns, too numerous for citation here, must be
referred to. No independent biography exists but among recent
writers the following should be consulted: BRADY, Episcopal
Succession (Rome, 1877); BRIDGETT-KNOX, Queen Elizabeth and the
Catholic Hierarchy (London, 1889); POLLARD in Dict. Nat. Biog.,
s. v.; PHILLIPS, The Extinction of the Ancient Hierarchy
(London, 1905); BIRT, The Elizabethan Religious Settlement
(London, 1907).
EDWIN BURTON
Ven. Thomas Tunstall
Ven. Thomas Tunstall
Martyred at Norwich, 13 July, 1616. He was descended from the
Tunstalls of Thurland, an ancient Lancashire family who
afterwards settled in Yorkshire. In the Douay Diaries he is
called by the alias of Helmes and is described as Carleolensis,
that is, born within the ancient Diocese of Carlisle. He took
the College oath at Douay on 24 May, 1607; received minor orders
at Arras, 13 June, 1609, and the subdiaconate at Douay on 24
June following. The diary does not record his ordination to the
diaconate or priesthood, but he left the college as a priest on
17 August, 1610. On reaching England he was almost immediately
apprehended and spent four or five years in various prisons till
he succeeded in escaping from Wisbech Castle. He made his way to
a friend's house near Lynn, where is was recaptured and
committed to Norwich Gaol. At the next assizes he was tried and
condemned (12 July, 1616). The saintliness of his demeanor on
the scaffold produced a profound impression on the people. There
is a contemporary portrait of the martyr at Stonyhurst, showing
him as a man still young with abundant black hair and dark
moustache.
CHALLONER, Memoirs of Missionary Priests, II (London, 1742);
Third Douay Diary, X, XI (Catholic Record Society, London,
1911); FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S.J., XII (London, 1879).
EDWIN BURTON
Simon Tunsted
Simon Tunsted
English Minorite, b. at Norwich, year unknown; d. at Bruisyard,
Suffolk, 1369. Having joined the Greyfriars at Norwich he
distinguished himself for learning and piety and was made a
doctor of theology. He filled several important ecclesiastical
charges, being at different times warden of the Franciscan
convent at Norwich, regent master of the Minorities at Oxford
(1351), and twenty-ninth provincial superior of his order in
England (1360). He wrote a commentary on the "Meteora" of
Aristotle, improved the "Albeon" of Richard of Wallingford; and
is the reputed author of another work, the "Quatuor Principalia
Musicae", a clear, practical, and very valuable medieval
treatise on music. Davey gives a thorough discussion of the
authorship of this work, which has been ascribed by different
writers on the history of music to Tunsted, to John Hanboys, and
to Thomas of Tewkesbury; but the arguments brought forward by
Davey show that it is certainly not the work of either Hanboys
or Thomas of Tewkesbury, whilst his conclusion with regard to
the first-named writer is that "the grounds for ascribing it to
Tunsted are admittedly insufficient; and internal evidence point
to the author being a foreigner either by birth or education".
DAVEY in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; IDEM, Hist. of English Music.
EDWARD C. PHILLIPS
Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot
Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot
Baron de L'Aulne, French minister, born at Parish, 10 May, 1727;
died there, 20 March, 1781. In his youth he was destined for the
Church; he composed a treatise on the existence of God, of which
fragments remain, and one on the love of God, which is lost. The
year 1750, during which he was prior of the Sorbonne, marks the
transition between the two periods of his life: on the one hand,
he delivered a discourse on the advantages accruing to the human
race from the Christian religion, which showed him as still an
ecclesiastic; on the other, he delivered a discourse on the
successive progress of the human mind, in which the true and
false ideas of the philosophers were mingled confusedly. In this
discourse he foretold the separation from England of the North
American colonies. Early in 1751 the influence of "philosophy"
prevailed over Turgot's mind and he decided not to receive Holy
orders. In 1752 he entered the magistracy, was master of
requetes in 1753, spending his leisure time in the acquirement
of further knowledge, and in 1761 became intendant at Limoges.
In the Limousin government Turgot inaugurated certain attempts
in conformity with the new ideas of the economists and
philosophers: free trade in corn and the suppression of the
taxes known as corvees.
When, after a short term in the ministry of marine, he was
appointed by Louis XVI (24 Aug., 1774) controller-general of
finances, he profited by the office which he held for twenty
months to apply in his general policy the principles of economic
Liberalism. This caused popular discontent, due especially to
the rise in the price of corn, but Turgot flattered himself that
he could quell all opposition. The edict, by which he
substituted for the corvee a territorial tax bearing on landed
property, displeased the privileged classes; that by which he
suppressed the maitrises and jurandes, an act which the
philosophers regarded as an advance, destroyed the professional
organization which in the Middle Ages, under the auspices of the
Church, regulated economic activity and which at present the
syndicalist movement in all countries is endeavouring to
re-establish. By depriving the Hotel Dieu of Paris of its
privilege of selling meat on Friday to the exclusion of the
butchers, by dispensing the owners of public vehicles from the
obligation they were under of allowing their drivers time on
Sunday to hear Mass, and by attempting to change the coronation
oath which he found too favourable to the Catholics, Turgot
displeased the clergy who accused him of indifference for the
disciplinary precepts of the Church. He was disgraced by Louis
XVI, 12 May, 1776. In his retirement he wrote for Price,
"Reflexions sur la situation des Americains des Etats Unis", and
for Franklin a treatise, "Des vrais principes de l'imposition".
His works were edited by Dussard and Daire (2 vols., Paris,
1844).
DUPONT DE NEMOURS, Memoires sur la vie et les ouvrages de Turgot
(2 vols., Paris, 1782); FONCIN, Essai sur le ministere de Turgot
(Paris, 1877); SAY, Turgot (Paris, 1877; tr., London, 1888);
SHEPHERD, Turgot and the Six Edicts (New York, 1903); DE SEGUR,
Au couchant de la monarchie. Louis X VI et Turgot (Paris, 1910);
STEPHENS, Life and Writings of Turgot (London, 1895).
GEORGES GOYAU
Turin
Turin
(Turino; Taurinensis)
The City of Turin is the chief town of a civil province in
Piedmont and was formerly the capital of the Duchy of Savoy and
of the Kingdom of Sardinia. It is situated on the left bank of
the Po and on right of the Dora Riparia, which flows into the Po
not far off. The surrounding flat country is fertile in grain,
pasturage, hemp, and herbs available for use in the industries,
while on the hills a delicious fungus, a species of truffle is
found. The district is also rich in minerals (a species of
gneiss and granite), and there are five mineral springs. The
population is 270,000.
Besides the numerous elementary and intermediate schools, public
and private, there are a university (see below), a musical
lyceum, commercial and industrial schools. The Accademia
Albertina (1652), for the fine arts, possesses the precious
Mossi Gallery (Raphael, Dolci, Caravaggio, Rubens, Van Dyck,
Giotto Andrea del Sarto, Correggio, Luca Giordano, Guercino, and
others, with cartoons of Leonardo da Vinci and others). There is
a royal academy of the sciences (1757) and a royal commission on
studies in Italian history. The documents of the general
archives go back as far as the year 934. Other institutions of
sciences and arts are the military academy, the Scuola di
Guerra, the practical school for the artillery and engineers,
and eight public libraries, among them the National (1714). The
last-named contains the precious Bobbio manuscripts and many
Greek and Egyptian papyri; in 1904 it was ravaged by a fire in
which valuable manuscripts perished, among them some which had
not yet been thoroughly studied. The Museum of Antiquities is of
great importance, containing a number of marbles collected
throughout Piedmont besides one of the most complete Egyptian
collections in existence, that made by Bernardino Drovetti, a
French consul in Egypt. Worthy of note also are the Royal
Gallery (Pinacoteca) and the zooelogical, mineralogical,
geological, anatomical, and the rich numismatical museum (the
king's medallion). Benevolent institutions are the Opera Pia di
S. Paolo, which includes the Pious Institute (ufficio pio) of
Alms for the poor and dowries for young girls, and the Monte di
Piet`a. The hospitals are those of S. Giovanni (fourteenth
century), of the Order of Sts. Mauriceand Lazarus, the Opera Pia
di S. Luigi (1792), the Ophthalmic Hospital, the Cottolengo
(Piccola Casa della Divina Providenza, founded in 1827 for every
kind of human misery, in which about 7000 sick, aged, and infirm
persons have found shelter), the Royal General Charity Hospice,
the asylum of the Infanzia Abbandonata, the Reale Albergo di
Virtu (1580). The Opera Pia Barolo has under its direction
various charitable and educational institutions. For the Rifugio
and Oratory of St. Francis de Sales, see Bosco.
CHURCHES
The cathedral, dedicated to St. John the Baptist, stands on the
site of three ancient churches, and was built (1492-98) by Meo
del Caprino, with an octagonal dome. Attached to the cathedral
is the chapel of the Santissimo Sudario, built by Guarini
(1694), where is preserved in a casket a cloth believed to be
the shroud in which the Body of Christ was wrapped when it was
taken down from the Cross, The Church of Corpus Domini records a
miracle which took place during the sack of the city in 1453,
when a soldier was carrying off an ostensorium containing the
Blessed Sacrament: the ostensorium fell to the ground, while the
Host remained suspended in air. The present splendid church,
erected in 1610 to replace the original chapel which stood on
the spot, is the work of Ascanio Vittozzi. The Consolata, a
sanctuary much frequented by pilgrims, stands on the site of the
tenth-century monastery of S. Andrea, and is the work of
Guarini. It was sumptuously restored in 1903. Outside the city,
are: S. Maria Ausiliatrice, erected by Don Bosco; the Gran Madre
di Dio, erected in 1818 on occasion of the return of King Victor
Emanuel I; S. Maria del Monte (1583) on the Monte dei Cappucini;
the Basilica of Superga, with a dome 244 feet high, the work of
Juvara, built by Amedeo II ex voto for the deliverance of Turin
(1706), and which has served since 1772 as a royal mausoleum.
PROFANE EDIFICES
The Royal Palace (1646-58) contains various splendidly decorated
halls and an extremely rich collection of arms of all periods
and all peoples, as well as the king's library. Under the palace
the remains of a Roman theatre were discovered. The Palazzo
Madama stands on the site of the old decuman gate, which became
a castle in the Middle Ages and was repeatedly enlarged until,
in 1718, it was finally prepared by Juvara for Madama Reale, as
she was called, the widow of Charles Emanuel II. It is now
occupied by the state archives and the observatory. The Palazzo
Carignano (1680), a work of Guarini, is the residence of the
younger branch of Savovy-Carignano, now the reigning house. This
palace was occupied by the Parliament from 1848 to 1864, and now
shelters the Museum of Natural History. The Academy of the
Sciences, formerly a Jesuit College (1679), houses the Museum of
Antiquities and the Pinaceoteca. The Palazzo di Citt`a or City
Hall (1669), the work of, Lanfranchi, contains the Biblioteca
Civica. There is also a Museo Civico di Belle Arti; and the Mole
Antenelliana, 580 feet high, contains the Museo di Risorgimento
(1863). The city itself is laid out on a very regular plan.
HISTORY
Before the Roman conquest of the Graian and Cottian Alps,
Taurasia was already an important city of the Taurini, a
Ligurian people. In 218 B.C. Hannibal destroyed it. Under
Augustus the conquest was completed, and the city was named
Augusta Taurinorum; it probably continued, however, to form part
of the dominions of Cottius, King of Secusio (the modern Susa).
In the war between Otho and Vitellius, it was almost entirely
burned down. None of the Roman monuments have survived except
the Porta Palatina, commonly known as the Towers, near which are
the remains of a monument erected early in the second century in
honour of Attilius Agricola. In the fifth and sixth centuries
the city suffered from the invasions of the Burgundians and of
Odoacer, and in the Gothic War. After the Lombard invasion it
became the capital of a duchy, and four of its dukes --
Agilulfus (589), Arioaldus (590), Garibaldus (661), Ragimbertus
(701) -- became kings of the Lombards. When the Lombard kingdom
fell, Turin became a residence of Frankish counts until, in 892,
it passed to the marquesses of Ivrea, from whom, through the
marriage of Adelaide with Odo of Savoy (1046), it passed into
the possession of the latter house. In 1130 the city was
constituted a commune, still remaining, however, under the
influence now of the counts of Savoy, now of the marquesses of
Saluzzo or of Monferrato, with whom, as also with the emperors,
they were frequently at war. From 1280 on, it was almost
constantly under the power of the House of Savoy, more
particularly the Acaia branch (1295-1418). After 1459 it was the
capital of the Duchy of Savoy. In 1536 it fell into the power of
Francis I of France, who established a parliament there; in 1562
Emanuel Philibert reconquered it. In 1638, during the quarrel of
the regency, the city was besieged by the French and defended by
Prince Thomas of Savoy. Still more memorable the siege of Turin
in 1706, again at the hands of the French, from which it was
relieved by Prince Eugene and by the sacrifice of Pietro Micca.
During the French occupation it was the capital of the
Department of the Po (1798-1814), though it was in the hands of
the Austro-Russian forces from May, 1799 until June 1800. In
1821 the revolution against Charles Emanuel broke out, and a
provisional government was set up, the king abdicaing in favor
of his brother Charles Felix. After that, Turin was the centre
of all Italian movements for the union of the Peninsula, whether
monarchical or republican. The transfer of the capital of the
Kingdom of Italy from Turin to Florence, in 1864, caused
another, though not important, revolution (21, 22 September).
The most ancient traditions of Christianity at Turin are
connected with the martyrdom of Sts. Adventor, Solutor, and
Candida, who were much venerated in the fifth century, and were
in later times included in the Theban Legion. As to the
episcopal see, it is certain that in the earlier half of the
fourth century Turin was subject to Vercelli. Perhaps, however,
St. Eusebius, Bishop of Vercelli, on his return from exile,
provided the city with a pastor of its own. In any case St.
Maximus can hardly be considered the first Bishop of Turin, even
though no other bishop is known before him. This saint, many of
whose homilies are extant, died between 408 and 423. It was
another Maximus who lived in 451 and 465. In 494 Victor went
with St. Epiphanius to France for the ransom of prisoners of
war. St. Ursicinus (569-609) suffered much from the depredations
of the French. It was then that the Diocese of Moriana
(Maurienne) was detached from that of Turin. Other bishops were
Rusticus (d. 691); Claudius (818-27), a copious, though not
original, writer, famous for his opposition to the veneration of
images; Regimirus (of uncertain date, in the ninth century), who
established a rule of common life among his canons; Amolone
(880-98), who incurred the ill-will of the Turinese and was
driven out by them; Gezone (1000), who founded the monastery of
the holy martyrs Solutor, Adventor, and Candida; Landolfo
(1037), who founded the Abbey of Cavour and repaired the losses
inflicted on his Church by the Saracen incursions; Cuniberto
(1046-81), to whom St. Peter Damian wrote a letter exhorting him
to repress energetically the laxity of his clergy; Uguccione
(1231-43), who abdicated the bishopric and became a Cistercian;
Guido Canale enlarged the cathedral; Thomas of Savoy (1328).
Under Gianfrancesco della Rovere (1510), Turin was detached from
the metropolitan obedience of Milan and became an archiepiscopal
see with Mondovi and Ivrea for suffragans, other sees being
added later on. In the time of Cesare Cibo the diocese was
infested with the Calvinistic heresy, and his successors were
also called upon to combat it. Cardinal Gerolamo della Rovere,
in 1564, brought to Turin the Holy Shroud and the body of St.
Maurice, the martyr.
From 1713 to 1727, owing to difficulties with the Holy See, the
See of Turin remained vacant. After 1848 Cardinal Luigi Fransoni
(1832-62) distinguished himself by his courageous opposition to
the encroachments of the Piedmontese Government upon the rights
of the Church, and in consequence was obliged to live in exile.
Notable among his successors are Cardinal Alimonda (1883-91), a
polished writer, and Cardinal Richelmy (1897), the present
incumbent of the see. The dioceses suffragan to Turin are Acqui,
Alba, Aosta, Asti, Cuneo, Fossano, Ivrea, Mondovi, Pinerolo,
Saluzzo, and Susa. The archdiocese comprises 276 parishes with
680,600 souls, 1405 secular and 280 regular priests, 35
communities of male and 51 of female religious, 15 educational
establishments for boys and 27 for girls. There are two Catholic
daily newspapers, "Momento" and "Italia Reale", two weeklies,
and many other instructive and edifying periodicals.
CAPPELLETTI, Chiese d'Italia, XIV; SAVIO, Gli antichi vescovi
Piemonte (Turin, 1899), 281; CIBRARIO, Storia di Torino (Turin,
1846); ISAIA, Torino e dintorni (Turin, 1909); SEMERIA, Storia
della chiesa di Torino (Turin, 1840); Guido Commerciale ed
amministrativa di Torino (Turin, 1911); Cenni storico-statistici
delle istituzioni publiche e private di beneficenza e di
assistenza del Commune di Torino (Turin' 1906); RONDOLINO, I
Visconti di Torino, in Bollettino Storico Subalpino (Pinerolo,
1901-02).
The University of Turin
The University of Turin
The University of Turin was founded in 1404, when the lectures
at Piacenza and Pavia were interrupted by the wars of Lombardy.
Some of the professors of theology, medicine, and arts at
Piacenza obtained permission from Louis of Savoy-Acaia to
continue their courses at Turin. This prince had obtained from
the antipope Benedict XIII, in 1405, the pontifical privilege
for a studium generale, and in 1412 the permission of the
emperor was likewise granted. In the following year John XXIII
confirmed the concessions of Benedict XIII rendered necessary by
the wars which had disturbed the studium of Turin. The studium
then comprised three faculties: theology, law (canon and civil),
medicine (with arts and philosophy). The Archbishop of Turin was
always chancellor of the university. As at Bologna, the rector
continued for a long time to be chosen from their own body by
the students, who in 1679 represented thirteen nations. The
professors' salaries were paid by the communes of Savoy; but
from 1420 the clergy also contributed, and at a later period the
dukes. In the seventeenth century the university levied a tax on
the Jews. Under Duke Amedo VIII, the State began to restrict the
autonomy of the studium by means of riformatori and subjected
the professors and students in criminal matters to ordinary
jurisdiction. From 1427 to 1436 the seat of the university was
temporarily transferred to Chieri and Savignano (1434). The
number of salaried professors in the years 1456 and 1533 was
twenty-five (only two of theology), but the number of lecturers
was much greater; e.g., in the statutes of the theological
faculty (1427-36) nineteen masters -- eleven Franciscans and and
eight Dominicans -- are named. Among the distinguished
Professors of that age were the jurisconsult Claudio Beisello, a
noted translator of many Greek classics, Pietro Carol Cristoforo
Castiglione e Grassi, the physician Guainiero, and the
theologian Francesco della Rovere, afterwards Sixtus IV.
In 1536 the university was closed, owing to the Franco-Spanish
war in Piedmont; in 1560 it was re-established at Mondovi by
Duke Emanuele Filiberto back to Turin, with laws permitting
increasing state interference in the affairs of the univeristy.
Ut acquired a great reputation, which, however declined under
Charles Emanmuel I (1580-1630), who, owing to the expenses of
the wars, had to suspend his financial contributions to the
Studium. In the seventeenth century the officials of the
respective nations granted the students the right to interrupt
the professors' lectures. Studies naturally languished. In 1687
there were 3 professors of theology, 13 of law, 10 of medicine,
6 of arts. The art course did not then include the
belles-lettres, which were taught in the Jesuit college. Victor
Amedeo II granted a new constitution to the university
(1720-29), which thence forward was a purely state institution;
he also had the present building erected after the design of
Gio. Antonio Ricca. A royal official was appointed to supervise
the observance of the Statutes and to act as a censor of books.
From 1729 the rector was chosen from among the professors. At
the same time the Collegio delle Provincie was established for
students not natives of Turin. The statutes contained a
regulation strictly obliging the students to be present in the
oratory of the university on holy days of obligation. On the
other hand, the king ordered the professors of theology to
observe neutrality concerning Gallicanism.
At the beginning of the French Revolution the university
declined rapidly; the school of anatomy, for instance became a
political club. Under Napoleon (1800-14) the studies were
reorganized according to french methods; several new chairs were
established, and the revival in this sense was continued by
Prospero Balbo. In 1821 the students, under the impulse of the
constitutional movement, rebelled, and severe measures were
adopted. Lectures were continued outside of the university. In
the third decade of the nineteenth century there were notable
agitations in the theological faculty in favour of papal
infallibility, and agitations brought about by the moralist
Dettorri, who was afterwards exiled. During the Revolution of
July 1830, the university was closed, and the schools dispersed
among different cities. In 1845 the curriculum was re-organized.
In the theological faculty chairs of ecclesiastical history,
oratory, and Biblical exegesis were established. In 1860 this
faculty was, here as elsewhere, abolished.
Among the distinguished professors of Turin since the sixteenth
century the jurist Gian Francesco Balbo and the physician
Giovanni Nevizzano are worthy of mention; after the restoration
of the university, the jurists Cuiacius and Pancirolus, the
physicians Blessed Giovenale Ancina (afterwards Bishop of
Saluzzo) and Lucille Filalteo; the Greek scholar Teodoro Rendio,
was called to the Collegio Greco by Gregory XIII. Distinguished
in the eighteenth century were Vincenzo Gravina and Luigi
Fantoni the jurisconsults, the Augustinian Giulio Accetta in
mathematics, the Piarist Giambattista Beecaria, in physics, the
Barnabite Sigismondo Gerdil, in ethics, Giambattista Carburi and
Vitaliano Donati in medicine, the historian Carlo Denino, and
Francesco Antonio Chionio, the professor of canon law whose work
"De regimine ecclesiae" caused scandal by reducing all religion
to internal worship, and leaving the control of the Church to
the civil power; in the nineteenth century: Father Peyron,
professor of Oriental languages a celebrated Egyptologist, the
philologists Vallauri and Fabretti, the mathematician and
physicist Galileo Ferrari, the historian Balbo, the physiologist
Cesare Lombroso. The university has 22 chairs of jurisprudence
with 18 professors and 20 docents; 24 chairs of physical and
mathematical sciences with 17 professors and 17 docents; 28
chairs of medicine with 25 professors and 89 docents; 22 chairs
of philosophy and literature with 19 professors and 21 docents.
In connection with the medical faculty are a school of pharmacy,
various clinics, laboratories, etc., as well as the
laboratories, cabinets, and astronomical observatory of the
other scientific faculties. In 1910-11 there were 2204 students
enrolled.
Annuario della Universita di Torino (1876); VALLAURI, Storia
delle Universit`a degli Studi in Piemonte (Turin, 1875); BONA,
Delle constituzioni dell' Universit`a di Torino (Turin, 1852).
U. BENIGNI
Turkestan
Turkestan
I. CHINESE TURKESTAN
When Jenghiz Khan died (1227) his second son, Djagatai, had the
greater part of Central Asia for his share of the inheritance:
his empire included not only Mavara-un-Nahr, between the Syr
Daria and the Amu Daria, but also Ferghana, Badakhshan, Chinese
Turkestan, as well as Khorasan at the beginning of his reign;
his capital was Almaliq, in the Ili Valley, near the site of the
present Kulja; in the fourteenth century the empire was divided
into two parts: Mavara-un-Nahr or Transoxina, and Moghulistan or
Jabah, the eastern division. In 1759 the Emperor K'ien Lung
subjugated the country north and south of the T'ienshan and
divided the new territory into T'ien-shan Peh-lu and T'ien-shan
Nan-lu; in 1762 a military governor was appointed and a new
fortified town, Hwei-yuan-ching, was erected (1764) near the
site of Kulja: a number of Manchus, from Peking and the Amu, and
Mongols were drawn to the new place and later on there came a
migration of Chinese from the Kan-su and Shen-si Provinces. The
local Mohammedan chieftains are known as Pe-k'e (Beg); they are
classed in five degrees of rank from the third to the seventh
degree of the Chinese hierarchy: the most important titles are
Akim Beg (local governor), Ishkhan Beg (assistant governor),
Shang Beg (collector of revenue), Hatsze Beg (judge), Mirabu Beg
(superintendent of agriculture).
The bad administration of the Chinese governors was the cause of
numerous rebellions; a great rising took place against the
Governor of Ili, Pi Tsing; at the head was Jihanghir, son of
Saddet Ali Sarimsak and grandson of one of the Khaja, Burhan
ed-Din; unfortunate at first, Jihanghir was victorious in
October, 1825, and captured the four great towns of T'ien-shan
Nan-lu: Kashgar, Yangi-hissar, Yarkand, and Khotan. The Chinese
Emperor Tao Kwang sent General Chang Ling to fight the rebels.
Jihanghir was defeated and made a prisoner at Kartiekai (1828)
and sent to Peking where he was put to death in a cruel manner.
On the other hand, the establishment of Orenburg by the
Russians, the exploration of the Syr Daria by Batiakov, the
foundation of Kazalinsk (1848) near the mouth of this river, the
exertions of Perovsky, the attacks of the Cossacks against the
Khanate of Khokand, had for result the arrival of the Russians
in the valley of the Ili River. On 25 July, 1851, Col.
Kovalevski signed with the Chinese on behalf of the Russians at
Kashgar a treaty regulating the trade at Ili (Kulja) and at
Tarbagatai (Chugutchak). In the meantime new rebellions broke
out after the death of Jihanghir: in 1846 one of the Khoja,
Katti Torah, with the help of his brothers took Kashgar, but was
soon defeated by the Chinese; in 1857 Wali Khan captured
Kashgar, Artosh, and Yangi-hissar; and at last, the son of
Jihanghir, Burzuk Khan, with the help of Mohammed Yakub, son of
Ismet Ulla, born about 1820 at Pskent in the Khanate of Khokand,
taking advantage of the Mohammedan rebellion of Kan-su, began a
new struggle against the Chinese. Yakub, having taken Burzuk's
place, subjugated Kashgar, Khotan, Aksu, and the other towns
south of the T'ien-shan, thus creating a new empire; his capital
was Yarkand, and there he received embassies from England in
1870 and 1873 (Sir Douglas T. Forsyth) and from Russian in 1872
(Col. Baron Kaulbars).
To check the advance of Yakub to the west, the Russians who had
captured Tashkent (27 June, 1865) took possession of Ili, i.e.
the north of the T'ien-shan, on 4 July, 1871. When the Chinese
had quelled the Yun-nan rebellion after the surrender of Ta-li,
they turned their armies against the Mohammedans of the
north-west; the celebrated Tso Tsung-tang, Viceroy of Kan-su and
Shen-si, had been appointed commander-in-chief; he captured
Su-chau (Oct., 1873), Urumtsi, Tih-hwa, and Manas (16 Nov.,
1876) when a wholesale massacre of the inhabitants took place;
the Russian Governor of Turkestan, General Kauffman, wrote a
protest against these cruelties. The task of the Chinese was
rendered easy by the death of Yakub (29 May, 1877); Aksu (19
Oct., 1877), Yar-kand (21 Dec.), Kashgar (26 Dec.), and at last
Kohtan (14 Jan., 1878) fell into their hands. The Chinese then
turned to the Russians to have Ili, occupied temporarily,
restored to them. Ch'ung-hou, sent as an ambassador to St.
Petersburg, signed at Livadia in Oct., 1879, a treaty ceding to
the Russians a large portion of the contested territory
including the Muz-Art Pass, giving them the privilege of selling
their goods not only at T'ien-tsin and Han-kou but also at
Kalgan, Kia-yu, Tang-shan, Si-ngan, and Hanchung; permission was
also granted to the Russians not only at Ili, Tarbagatai,
Kashgar, and K'urun, but also at Kiayue-kwan, Kobdo, Uliasut'ai,
Hami, Turfan, Urumtsi, and Kushteng. The treaty was strongly
attacked by the censor, Chang Chi-tung, and Ch'ung-hou, tried by
a high court, was sentenced to death. War between Russia and
China very nearly broke out, but, thanks to the good offices of
foreign powers, a new embassy sent to Russia with the Marquis
Tseng arranged matters. A new treaty was signed at St.
Petersburg, 12 (24) Feb., 1881, and Russia kept but the western
part of the contested territory, restoring the pass of Muz-Art
and giving up some of the commercial privileges granted by the
Livadia Treaty.
After the Mohammedan rebellion had been crushed, the territory
was organized in 1878 and was called Sin-Kiang or New Dominion,
the names Eastern Turkestan and Chinese Turkestan being also
used; it is bounded on the north by Siberia, on the west by
Russian Turkestan and India, on the south by Tibet, and on the
east by Mongolia and the Chinese Province of Kan-su. Its area is
550,579 square miles, with a population of 1,200,000 inhabitants
scattered over this immense desert varying in altitude from 3000
to 4000 feet above the level of the sea and surrounded by
mountains: in the south the Kwen-lun and its two branches, the
Nan-shan and the Altyn-Tagh; in the west, the Karakoram, the
Pamirs and the Trans-Altai; in the north by the T'ien-shan,
north of which chain the country is called T'ien-shan Peh-lu or
Sungaria, and south of it T'ien-shan Nanlu or Kashgaria. The
chief river of Chinese Turkestan is the Tarim or Tali- mu-ho,
about 1250 miles in length, resulting from the junction of the
rivers or darias, watering Yarkand, Khotan etc.; finally the
Tarim empties its waters into the Lob-Nor, now more of a marsh
but a lake in ancient times. The principal passes to enter
Sin-Kiang are the following: the Tash-Davan (Kwen-lun range),
south of Lob-Nor; the Karakoram Pass, road leading from Yarkand
to Leh in Ladak; the Shishiklik Pass, in the Pamirs; the Kyzil
Art Pass, in the Trans-Alai; the Muz-Art, road from Kulija to
Aksu; the Terek-Davan, in the Western T'ien-shan, the Urumtsi
Pass, in the Eastern T'ien-shan; the Talki Pass, to the north of
the Ili Valley.
Sin-Kiang includes the following regions: Hami or Qomujl or Pa
Shan; the great Gobi Desert or Shamo, the largest portion of
Turkestan, the south-west part of it is the Takla-makan Desert;
the region of oases (Khotan, Yarkand, Kashgar, Aksu, Uch-Turfan,
Yangi-hissar); the Turfan region (Turfan, Karashar); Sungaria
(Urumtsi, Kuch'eng); the Ili region (Kulja). Sin-Kiang is
crossed by three main roads: (1) from Kan-su to Turfan, by
Ngansi and Hami; (2) north from Urumtsi to Kulja, via Manas; (3)
south from Turfan to Kashgar, via Karashar, Kurla, Kucha, Aksu,
Maralbashi; there is also a route from Kashgar to Lob-Nor, via
Khotan, Kiria, Charchan, Lob-Nor, thence to Sha Chou; this is
Marco Polo's itinerary. The New Dominion is divided into four
Tao or Intendancies: Chen Ti Tao (Tih-hwa Fu), in 1908 Jung Pei
was Tao-t'ai and judge; Aksu Tao (Yenk'i Fu), Tao-t'ai vacant in
1908; Kashgar Tao (Sulofu), in 1910 Yuan Hung-yu was Tao-t'ai;
and I T'a Tao (Ning yuan hien), in 1908 K'inghiu was Tao-t'ai.
It includes six Fu or Prefectures: Tih-hwa or Urumtsi, Yenki or
Karashar, Su lo or Kashgar, Soch'e or Yarkand, Wensuh or Aksu,
and Ili; two Chou, K'uch'e or Kucha, and Hwotien or Khotan; and
eight T'ing: Yingkihshaeul or Yangi-hissar, Wushih or
Uch-Turfan, K'ueulk'ohlah Wusu or Kurkara-usu, Chensi or Barkul,
Hami or Qomul, T'ulufan or Turfan, Tsingho, and T'ahch'eng or
Tarbagatai.
The administration of Sin-Kiang has at its head a Fu-t'ai (in
1908, Lien K'uei), who resides at Urumtsi and is deputed by the
Shen-Kan Tsung-tu (Viceroy of Kan-su and Shen-si) whose seat is
at Lan-chou, Kan-su; the treasurer, Fan-t'ai (in 1908, Wang
Shu-nan), who resides at Urumtsi (Tih-hwa); as well as the
judge, Nieh-t'ai, who is also the Tao-t'ai of the circuit. The
four Tao-t'ai have been mentioned. There are three Tsung Ping
(brigade generals) at Aksu (Yenk'i), Palik'un (Barkul), and Ili.
The Banner Organization includes: at Ili, a Tsiangkukn (Tatar
general), a Futut'ung (deputy military lieut. governor), a Ts'an
Tsan Ta Ch'en (military assistant governor), and the Ling Tui Ta
Ch'en (commandants of forces) of Solun, Oalot, Chahar, Sibe; at
Tarbagatai, a Futut'ung, and Ts'an Tsan Ta Chien; at Uliasut'ai,
a Tsiang Kuen and two Ts'an Tsan Ta Ch'en; at Urga, a Panshi Ta
Ch'en (commissioner) and a Pangpan Ta Ch'en (assistant
commissioner); at Kobdo, a Ts'an Tsan Ta Ch'en and a Panshi Ta
Ch'en; and at Si Ning, a Panshi Ta Ch'en.
Mission
The Ili country is a part of the second ecclesiastical region of
China; it was constituted as a distinct mission (Ili or
Sin-Kiang mission) at the expense of the Vicariate apostolic of
Kan-su by a decree of 1 October, 1888; it is placed under the
care of the Belgian missionaries (Cong. Imm. Cord. B.M.V. de
Scheutveld) with Jean-Baptiste Steeneman as their superior. The
mission includes five European priests and 300 Christians.
II. RUSSIAN TURKESTAN
Russian Central Asia includes the two khanates under Russian
protection, Bokhara and Khiva, and the Turkestan region with its
five provinces: Syr Daria, Samarkand, Ferghana, Semirechensk,
and Transcaspian; it extends from the Caspian Sea to China, and
from Siberia to Persia and Afghanistan, with an area of 721,277
square miles for Turkestan and 63,012 square miles for the
Khanates. To the east, towards China, the country is mountainous
and contains numerous lakes, Balkash, Issyk-kul, etc.; to the
west, it is a large plain with desiccated lakes, watered by the
two large rivers, Amu Daria and Syr Daria which run into the
Aral Sea. The conquest of this region began in 1867 with the
annexation of the country south of Lake Balkash, and occupation
of the valley of the Syr Daria, forming the provinces of
Semirechensk and Syr Daria; in 1878 the Zarafshan district was
added and became subsequently the Samarkand Province. Later on,
in 1873, part of the Khanate of Khiva, on the right bank of the
Amu Daria, was occupied and was incorporated with the Syr Daria
Province. In 1875 and 1876 the Khanate of Khokand being annexed
became the Province of Ferghana. The population is but 6,243,422
inhabitants including, on the one hand, Russians, Poles,
Germans, etc.; on the other, the natives: Aryans, Sarts, Tajiks,
Tzigans, Hindus, with Mongols: Kirghizs, Ubeks, Torbors, etc.,
and emigrated Jews and Arabs representative of the Semitic Race.
The chief products are corn, barley, rice, jugara, cotton.
Cattle-breeding is the main source of commerce. The trade of
Turkestan amounts to about 320 millions and a half of rubles, of
which 140 millions and a half are exportation and 180 millions
are importation. The chief trading province is Ferghana with 120
millions. Tashkent, the chief city of the Syr Daria Province, is
also the centre of the administration of Russian Turkestan with
a population of 191,500 inhabitants, of which 150,622 are
natives, for the most part (140,000) Sarts. The two main rivers
of Russian Turkestan which flow into the Aral Sea are the Syr
Daria, Sihun, or Jaxartes, and the Amu Daria, Tihun, or Oxus.
HENRI CORDIER
Turkish Empire
Turkish Empire
Created in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries on the ruins
of the Byzantine Empire, from the caliphate of Baghdad and
independent Turkish principalities. It occupies a territory of
1,114,502 sq. miles, with a population estimated at 25,000,000
inhabitants, and extends over parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe
between the Eastern Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Indian
Ocean, and the Red Sea. The Turkish Empire thus possesses some
of the most important highways by land and sea, between these
three continents.
I. GEOGRAPHY
A. The Balkan Peninsula (European Turkey)
The Balkan Peninsula (European Turkey), divided into eight
provinces or vilayets, comprises the plateaux and terraces which
extend to the south-east of the uplands of the Alps between the
Adriatic, the Archipelago, and the Black Sea. Turkey still
possesses Albania and Epirus, a vast plateau covered with
towering mountain ranges (Techar-Dagh, 10,000 ft.) and with
uplands stretching from the north-west to the south-east which
reach as far as the Pindus; the coastal plains of the Adriatic
and the small inland levels (Scutari Lake, Lake Ochrida, plains
of Monastir d'Uskuf and of Yanina) are separated by very high
ridges; Macedonia, a plain richly cultivated with vines,
cereals, and tobacco, includes within the mountains of Macedonia
to the west, Rhodope (9842 feet) to the north, Olympus to the
south-west, the sharp and rocky peninsula of Chalcidice to the
southeast; its only outlet, the port of Salonica (144,000
inhabitants), situated at the opening of an historical trade
highway which ascends to the valley of the Vardar as far as
Uskub, and over a hill of 1640 feet leads to the valley of the
Bulgarian Morawa and as far as the Danube (railway route from
Belgrade to Salonica): the plain of Thrace, bordering on the
Archipelago and the Sea of Marmora, forming the lower level of
the valley of the Maritza, of which Eastern Rumelia represents
the upper. Cultivation is broken by the great stretch of sterile
plateaux; the only important city in the interior is Adrianople
(125,000 inhabitants), but at the extremity of the peninsula
situated between the Black Sea, the Archipelago, and the Sea of
Marmora, stands Constantinople, which occupies, on the Bosporus,
one of the finest strategetical positions of the old continent.
This metropolis of 1,500,000 inhabitants is at the cross-roads
formed by the great waterway which connects the Black Sea with
the Mediterranean, and by the overland route (followed by a
railway) which reaches the valley of the Danube by way of
Adrianople, Philippopoli, Sofia, and Belgrade. It is composed of
the Turkish city of Stamboul, of the European districts of
Galata and Pera separated by the natural roadstead of the Golden
Horn, and of the suburbs of Scutari, Haidar-Pacha, and Kadi
Keui. These settlements are on both sides of the Bosporus, in
Europe and Asia. On account of its military and commercial
importance and its population composed of all the races of the
earth, Constantinople is a typical cosmopolitan city.
The Peninsula of Asia Minor, or Plateau of Anatolia
Important for the richness of its coastal plains and its
geographical situation; the construction of the railway from
Constantinople to Baghdad (in 1912, 781 miles of track open for
traffic from Constantinople to Boulgourlou by Eski-Chehir and
Konieh) will result in a rebirth of this ancient country; a
German company is at present fertilizing the plain of Konieh,
diverting for this purpose the waters of a lake.
C. Syria
A narrow strip of land, 500 miles long by 93 wide, lies between
Asia Minor; Egypt, the Mediterranean, and the Desert. It is
traversed by the two parallel ridges of Libanus (ranging from
three or four thousand to nine thousand feet) and Anti-Libanus,
separated by a deep depression, the Gor bounded on the north by
the valley of the Orontes, on the south by that of the Jordan,
which abuts on the gorge of the Dead Sea, 1200 feet below the
sea level. The most important centres are the ports of Beirut
(185,000 inhabitants), St. Jean d'Acre, and Jaffa (55,000
inhabitants), whence starts the railway to Jerusalem (115,000
inhabitants). The largest city is Damascus (350,000 inhabitants)
in the middle of an oasis of luxuriant vegetation, one of the
chief industrial centres of the Orient.
D. Mesopotamia and Turkish Armenia, or Kurdistan
Separated from Syria by the Great Desert, extends on the north
to Anatolia and Armenia by the vast mountain ranges of
Kurdistan, 13,000 feet, intercepted from the plains in the
interior by Lake Van, whence flow the Tigris and the Euphrates,
whose alluvial valleys are marvelously fertile; corn, wheat,
barley, grain, one might say, originated here. Cotton may be
also found in abundance, rice and plantations of date palms, and
fruit-trees of every kind. The leading centres of Armenia are
Erzerum, Van, and Ourfa. In Mesopotamia Mossoul (69,000
inhabitants), Baghdad (125,000 inhabitants), and Bassorah give
but a feeble idea of the once great cities of Ninive, Babylon,
and Seleucia-Ctesiphon.
E. The Peninsula of Arabia
The Peninsula of Arabia is a spacious desert plateau, bounded by
immense mountain ranges, which rise over 9000 feet above the Red
Sea. Scarcely a seventh of this vast territory (over 1,000,000
sq. miles) is dependent on the sultan, and that more nominally
than in reality. The volcanic plateau of the centre (Nedjed or
Arabia Petraea) is almost a desert. The population has flocked
to the coast districts (Hedjaz and Yemen, or Arabia Felix). The
only important centres are the sacred cities of the Mussulmans:
Mecca (60,000 inhabitants) with its port Djeddah, where the
Caaba, which preserves the "black stone" of Abraham, draws each
year numerous pilgrims from all points of the Moslem world, and
Medina (50,000 inhabitants), where Mohammed resided and died.
The possession of these cities lends great political importance
to the Turkish Government. A railway, intended to unite Damascus
to Mecca, was laid to Medina in 1908.
F. Tripolitana
Tripolitana, occupied largely at present (1912) by the Italians,
is in reality the Saharan coast of the Mediterranean. It is
composed of plains of sand and rocky plateaux, to the east the
plateau of Barka(ancient Cyrenaica whose coasts in antiquity
were very fertile), the oasis and city of Tripoli (30,000
inhabitants), and the inland the oasis of Ghadames. On this
territory of 462,767 sq. miles there are scarcely one million
inhabitants. The principal resources and in the oases date
palms.
II. HISTORY
The countries which form this immense territory represent what
remains of the conquests of the Ottomans, a Turkish tribe
originally from Khorassan, which emigrated into Asia Minor about
1224, at the time of the cataclysm produced in Central Asia by
the Mongolian invasion of Jenghiz-Khan. The chiefs of the tribe
of the Kei-Kankali became the mercenaries of the Seljuk emirs of
Asia Minor. One of them, Othman, proclaimed himself independent
at the end of the thirteenth century, and took the title of
sultan, or padishah. Under Orkhan was organized with some
Christian captives the permanent militia of the Janissaries; and
then began incessant war between the Ottomans and the Byzantine
Empire. In 1359 Suleiman entered Europe by the occupation of
Gallipoli. Murad established himself at Adrianople (1360) and
attacked the Slavonic peoples of the Balkans. The battle of
Kossovo (1389) gave him Servia. The struggle continued until the
taking of Constantinople by Mahomet II, who put an end to the
Byzantine Empire (1453) and conquered the Peloponnesus (1462),
Negropont (1467), Trebzond (1470), Bosnia, and Wallachia. He
died in 1481, after failing to take Belgrade and Rhodes, but
achieving the conquest of Anatolia as far as the Euphrates, and
the peninsula of the Balkans as far as the Danube. To these
conquests Selim I added Azerbaidjan, Syria, and Egypt (1517),
Diarbekir and Mesopotamia (1518); he received from Mecca the
banner of the prophet, and took the title of caliph, which
assures to the Sultan of Constantinople the spiritual authority
over all the Mussulmans of the world.
Soliman I took Rhodes from the Knights of St. John (1522) and
conquered Hungary while Khaireddin Barbarossa subjected the
Barbary States (1522). Selim II took possession of the Island of
Cyprus (1570), but the Turkish domination had reached the limits
of its extension. Soliman had been unable to take either Vienna
(1526) or Malta (1562), and in 1571 the great victory of the
Christian fleet at Lepanto weakened the naval power of the Turks
in the Mediterranean. At the end of the sixteenth century The
Turkish Empire had attained the zenith of its power on land. The
siege of Vienna of 1683, which failed thanks to the intervention
of the King of Poland, John Sobieski, marks the last aggressive
attempt of the Turks on the West. Henceforth the western powers
encroach on the Turkish Empire and begin its dismemberment. In
1699 by the treaty of Karlovitz the Sultan ceded Hungary and
Transylvania to Austria. It is true that in 1739 the Turks
succeeded in retaking Belgrade, but this was their last military
success. The powerful militia of the Janissaries was of no
further use; the administration was corrupt and venal. Moreover,
the Turks were unable to impede the progress of Russia; in 1774
by the treaty of Kainardji the Turks ceded to Russia the Crimea
and the coasts of the Black Sea, and to Austria Rumanian
Bukowina. The French Revolution of 1789 saved Turkey from the
project of division planned by Catherine II; the Peace of Jassy
(1792) restored only a part of Bessarabia of the Dniester.
Egypt, occupied in 1789, surrendered to Turkey in 1800, but in
the most precarious condition. After the nineteenth century
began the forward movement of the Christian nationalities which
had submitted up to that time to Turkish domination; public
opinion in Europe upheld this movement, and the governments
themselves were won over. Meanwhile the rival ambitions of the
powers prevented the "Eastern Question" from being regulated in
a definitive manner. In 1821 the insurrection of the Greeks,
supported by Europe, ended in the creation of the Kingdom of
Greece (Treaty of Adrianople, 1829; and Conference of London,
1831).
The Servians formed an autonomous principality as early as 1830,
and in 1832 the Pasha of Egypt, Mehemet-Ali, revolted; his
independence was conceded to him in 1841, on condition that he
would recognize the suzerainty of the sultan. In vain the Turks
tried to reform; after the massacre and the dissolution of the
Janissaries (1826) Mahmoud organized an army resembling the
European, established military schools and a newspaper, and
imposed the European costume on his subjects. In 1839
Abdul-Medjid organized the Tanzimat (new regime) and accorded to
his subjects a real charter, liberty, religious toleration and
promises of a liberal government. In 1854 the Tsar Nicholas of
Russia strove to take up again the project of Catherine II, and
to do away with "the sick man". Protected by France and England,
Turkey kept, at the Congress of Paris (1856), all of its
territory save Moldavia and Wallachia, which were declared
autonomous. The Hatti-Humayoun of 16 Feb., 1856, proclaimed the
admission of Christians to all employments and equality with
other subjects before the law, but after the Liberal government
of Fuad Pasha they resumed their former ways. On all sides the
provinces revolted, and about 1875 formed the party of Young
Turkey, desirous of reforming the empire on the European model.
Two sultans, Abdul-Aziz and Murad, were successively deposed. A
new sultan, Abdul-Hamid, proclaimed on 23 Dec., 1876, a
constitution resembling the European with a parliament and
responsible ministers; but the reforming grand vizier Midhat
Pasha was strangled, and the opening of parliament was no more
than a comedy. Europe decided to act, and in 1877 Russia took
the lead and sent an army across the Balkans, after the
difficult siege of Plevna and would have entered Constantinople
had it not been for the intervention of an English fleet. The
treaty of San Stefano (March, 1878) established a Grand
Principality of Bulgaria, and cut Turkey in Europe into many
sections. Bismarck, alarmed by the progress of Russia, had this
treaty revised at the Congress of Berlin (1878); the independent
Bulgarian principality was reduced to Moesia to the north of the
Balkans; Eastern Rumelia alone was autonomous, and Macedonia
remained Turkish. The independence of Servia, Montenegro, and
Rumania was sanctioned. Greece received Thessaly; Austria
occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina; England established herself in
the Island of Cyprus. This treaty, ratified by all the powers,
was followed by new dismemberments. In 1855 Eastern Rumelia was
annexed to Bulgaria. In 1897 Crete revolted, and tried to
reunite Greece. After the victorious campaign of his army in
Thessaly the sultan kept the sovereignty of Crete, but with an
autonomous Christian governor, a son of the King of Greece.
In contrast to his predecessors, who had sought to restore their
country by reforming it, the Sultan Abdul-Hamid established a
regime of ferocious repression against the Young Turks, who were
partisans of the reforms. A formidable police pursued all those
who were suspected of Liberal ideas, and an unpitying censorship
undertook the impossible task of depriving Turkey of European
publications; the introduction of the most inoffensive books,
such as Baedeker's guides, was prohibited. Emissaries everywhere
revived Mussulman fanaticism; to the claims of the Armenian
revolutionaries the Sultan responded by frightful massacres of
the Armenians of Constantinople (Sept., 1895), followed soon by
the slaughter which in 1896 drenched Kurdistan with blood;
everywhere Armenians were tracked, and isolated massacres of
Christians became also the normal order of events in Macedonia
Educated in Western ideas, the Young Turks, especially the
refugees at Paris, united as early as 1895, and succeeded in
spite of prohibitions in circulating in Turkey their journal the
"Mechveret". A Committee of Union and Progress was even formed
at Constantinople, and by constant propaganda succeeded in
gaining to its cause the greater number of the officials. The
uprising, the preparation of which deceived the Hamidian police,
began 23 July, 1908, at Salonica; an ultimatum was sent to the
sultan, who, abandoned even by his Albanians, proclaimed the
re-establishment of the constitution (24 July, 1908) in the
midst of indescribable enthusiasm, and called a parliament (4
Dec., 1908).
In three months 300 journals were started. Abroad, the
counterstroke to this revolution was the definitive annexation,
proclaimed by the Emperor of Austria, of Bosnia and Herzegovina
(3 Oct., 1908). At the same time the Prince of Bulgaria took the
title of Tsar of the Bulgarians (6 Oct., 1908), and repudiated
the vassalage which still connected him with the sultan.
This exterior check weakened the Young Turk party, and on 13
April, 1909, a counter-revolution of Softas and soldiers of the
guard broke out in Constantinople. The Young Turks had to flee
the capital, but immediately the troops of Salonica, Monastir,
and Adrianople consolidated and marched against Constantinople
and laid siege to it (17 April, 1909). Negotiations continued
for six days; finally at the moment when the massacre of the
Christians seemed imminent, the Salonican troops entered
Constantinople, and after a short battle became masters of the
place. On 27 April Abdul-Hamid was forced to sign his
abdication, and banished to Salonica. A son of Abdul-Medjid was
made sultan under the name of Mohammed V, and a new constitution
was proclaimed, 5 Aug., 1909, the Committee of Union and
Progress superintending its execution with dictatorial powers.
To-day Turkey is on the road, to reform and political
reorganization.
III. RACES, NATIONALITIES, AND RELIGIONS
According to a tradition which dates back to the earliest
antiquity, Oriental nationalities did not commonly form compact
groups settled within well-defined boundaries. As a result of
violent transmigrations of peoples owing to hurricane-like
invasions, or even by the simple chance of migrations due to
economic causes, all the races of the Orient are mingled in an
inextricable manner, and there is not a single city of the
Ottoman Empire which does not contain specimens of all races,
languages, and religions. The population has therefore an
entirely heterogeneous character; the Turks have never made any
effort to assimilate their subjects; they do not appear even to
have attempted to propagate Islamism widely. Until the
constitution of 1876, and in fact as late as the revolution of
1908, they have jealously striven to safeguard their privileges
as conquerors. Up to the present time the population of the
empire may be said to be divided into three classes:
+ The Mussulmans (Turks, Arabs, Servians, Albanians), enjoying
alone the right of holding office, the only landowners, but
subject to military service.
+ The Raias (flocks), or infidels, conquered peoples who have
obtained the right of preserving their religion, but barred
from all office and subjected to heavy tax. It was upon them
that the despotism of the pashas was exercised. They are
still, following the creed to which they belong, divided into
"nations" governed by religious authorities, Christian
bishops, Jewish rabbis, responsible to the sultan, but
provided with certain jurisdiction over their faithful.
+ European subjects, established in Turkey for religious or
commercial reasons, and under the official protection and
jurisdiction of the ambassadors of the Powers. Many of the
raias of class have, however, succeeded in obtaining this
privilege.
In 1535 the first "capitulation" was signed between the King of
France, Francis I, and the Sultan Soliman. It accorded to France
the protectorate over all the Christians. This agreement was
often renewed, in 1604, 1672, 1740, and 1802. At the treaty of
Kainardji Russia obtained a similar right of protection over the
Orthodox Christians. The rights of France to the protection of
Catholics of all nationalities have been recognized repeatedly
by the Holy See, and particularly by the Encyclical of Leo XIII
"Aspera rerum conditio" (22 May, 1886). The treaty of Berlin
left to each state the care of protecting its subjects, but in
practice France preserves the protectorate over Catholics, and
even the diplomatic rupture between France and the Holy See has
not impaired these civil rights. Each of the Great Powers has
therefore considerable interests in the Turkish Empire: each one
its own postal autonomy, courts, schools, and organizations for
propaganda, teaching, and charity.
The Young Turk party, in power to-day, dreams of overthrowing
this arrangement. The new constitution granted by the Sultan
Mohammed V, 5 Aug., 1909, proclaims the equality of all subjects
in the matter of taxes, military service, and political rights.
For the first time Christians are admitted into the army, and
the parliament, which meets at Constantinople, is chosen
indiscriminately by all the races. The effect of this new regime
appears to be, in the view of the Young Turks, the establishment
of a common law for all subjects, the suppression of all
privileges and capitulations. But the religious communities, or
millets, hold to the ancient statutes which have safe-guarded
their race and religion; the three oldest, those of the Greeks,
the Armenians, and Jews, date back to the day following the
taking of Constantinople by Mohammed II.
The rest of the European powers have in the Turkish Empire,
political, economic, and religious interests of considerable
importance; a certain number of public services, such as that of
the public debt, or institutions like the Ottoman Bank, have an
international character. The same holds good of most of the
companies which are formed to execute public works, docks,
railways, etc. . . The trade in exports and imports involves
large sums of money, as one may judge by the following table:
FOREIGN COMMERCE from 1 MARCH, 1908, to 28 FEBRUARY, 1909 (IN PIASTRES)
Country Imports Exports
England 941,274 513,723
France 337,057 363,361
Germany 193,567 114,998
Austro-Hungry 407,519 247,774
Russia 249,417 57,489
Egypt 116,275 165,673
United States 116,275 70,332
A veritable economic war is going on between the Powers,
desirous of exploiting the riches of the Orient; to the secular
ambitions which menace the existence of the "sick man" have been
added new forms of greed. Neither the Russians nor the Greeks
have ceased to consider Constantinople as the historic goal of
their efforts, and Bulgaria, deprived of Macedonia is claimed by
the treaty of Berlin, also finds in its traditions claims on the
same heritage. Macedonia is claimed by the Greeks, Bulgarians,
Servians, and the Kutzo-Vlachs or Rumanians; Salonica has become
a commercial centre for Austrian exportation; and the annexation
of Bosnia and Herzegovina has by one and the same stroke
reinforced Austro-Hungarian and German influence in the Balkan
Peninsula. Italy has some clients in Albania, and is seeking at
the present moment to take possession of Tripoli.
Finally, France, England, and Germany are fighting to establish
their moral and economic influence. France has maintained an
important position because of the protection that it has always
exercised over Catholics; French in the Orient has become a kind
of second vernacular; while the influence of Germany has
increased in the last few years for political reasons, by which
the development of German commerce has profited. The European
Powers, anxious for the defence of their own interests, are not,
however, ready to abandon their capitulations. The Turkish
Empire has moreover entered into a period of transformation, the
end of which no one can foresee, and what delays still more the
task of the new power is the infinite diversity of races and
religions which make up the empire.
Although the statistical documents are very incomplete, the
total population of the empire, including Egypt and the
dependencies (Crete, governed by Prince George under the control
of the Powers; Samos, governed since 1832 by a Greek prince
appointed by the sultan), can be estimated at 36,000,000. Under
the direct government of the sultan there are only 25,926,000
subjects, who belong to the following races: (1) Turks, or
Osmanlis, estimated at 10,000,000, are settled throughout Asia
Minor, the cities of Europe and Syria, and some cantons of
Macedonia; most of them are Mussulmans. (2) Arabs (7,000,000),
in Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Tripoli, forming several
sects of Mussulmans. (3) Jews, scattered almost everywhere (Jews
of Spanish origin form half of the population of Salonica);
compact Jerusalem and its outskirts, at Baghdad, Mossoul, and
Beirut. Samaritans inhabit the sanjak of Naplouse. (4) Gipsies,
a mysterious race, are scattered throughout the empire. (5)
Armenians, who have swarmed outside of their country and form
powerful colonies in Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Constantinople,
and Turkey in Europe. From a religious standpoint they are
Catholics, Gregorians, or Protestants. (6) Caucasian races:
Lazes of Trebizond, Mussulmans or Orthodox Greeks; Kurds,
fanatical Mussulmans scattered around Erzerum, Angora, Mossoul,
Sivas; Circassians, spread throughout Asia Minor, Mussulmans.
(7) Syrians, The descendants of Aramaean peoples, divided into a
multitude of communities of different language and religion;
Chaldeans, in Baghdad, Mossoul, Aleppo, Beirut, or Nestorians,
speaking partly Syrian and partly Arabic. The Melchites speak
Arabic, but belong to the Greek Church. The Jacobites, or
Monophysies, speak Arabic and Syriac. The Marionites of the
Lebanon and of Beirut speak Arabic and are Catholics. The Druses
of the Lebanon form an heretical Mussulman sect. (8) The Greeks
have remained in their historic country; as in antiquity they
are a maritime people; they form powerful groups at
Constantinople, Adrianoyple, Salonica, in Macedonia, Asia Minor,
in the isles, in Syria, and in Crete. They belong to the
Orthodox or to the Greek Uniat Church. They are of considerable
importance in the empire. (9) The Albanians appear to be the
remnant of a very ancient race. They form in the west of the
Balkan Peninsula (Albania) a compact group and still lead a
semi-patriarchal life. A large part (1,000,000) is Mussulman,
the others, (30,000) Catholic: among them may be found the
Powerful tribe of the Mirdites. In 1911 the new government was
obliged to direct an expedition against them to effect their
disarmament. (10) The Slav peoples, Bulgarians and Servians, are
scattered over Macedonia and Old Servia, where they oppose Greek
influence; they are divided between Islamism, Orthodox
Christianity, and Catholicism. (11) The Kutzo-Vlachs or
Rumanians, Orthodox or Catholics, inhabit Macedonia, where they
are mostly shepherds. (12) Finally, in all Turkish cities may be
found a great number of families of European origin, settled in
the country for a long period and who have lost their ethnical
characters and their languages. Such are the Levantines, who
seek to obtain from the ambassadors foreign naturalization for
the sake of its privileges.
From a religious standpoint the Mussulmans may be estimated at
50 per cent of the population, the Orthodox Church 46 per cent,
Catholics 3 per cent, other communities, Jews, Druses etc., at 1
per cent. In Turkey in Europe, on the contrary, there are 66
percent of Christians to 33 percent Mussulmans.
(1) Mussulmans
The Mussulman religion has remained the religion of the state.
The sultan is always the caliph, the spiritual head of the
Mussulmans of the whole world. The Mussulmans comprise the
majority of Turks, Arabs, and a portion of the Albanians,
Bulgarians, Greeks etc. Polygamy is always legal; four
legitimate wives and an unlimited number of concubines are
permitted to the believers. Under the influence of Western ideas
and Christianity, monogamy tends to establish itself. Divorce
exists, and the divorced woman can remarry. The sexes are always
separated in the family home, which comprises the selamlik (male
apartments) and the harem (female apartments). It is the same in
the tramways, railways, ships etc. The women cannot go out
except veiled, but circulate freely in the streets of the cities
unaccompanied. Slavery is always active, but it has kept a
patriarchal character. The master must endow his slave when the
latter marries, and the Koran obliges him to provide for the
needs of his slaves. Education is progressing. In principle it
is obligatory. Primary education is free, a secondary school
exists at the capital of each vilayet, as well as one free
professional school. Instruction of women is developing at
Constantinople; the Lyceum of Galata-Serai, organized by French
professors, has 1100 pupils. Higher instruction is represented
by the University of Constatinople and special schools. An
Imperial museum of archaeology has been created at
Tchilini-Kiosk.
As in all Mussulman countries the spiritual and temporal duties
are blended, and civil relations are regulated by religious law
which consists in the Koran and the Cheriat, collection of
customs. The interpreters of this law are the ulemas, who form a
powerful clergy whose head, the Sheikh-ul-islam, has the rank of
vizier, and access to the council of ministers, or divan. At
twelve years of age the future ulemas leaves the primary school
and enters a medresse (seminary attached to the mosque) as a
softa (student) where he learns grammar, ethics, and theology.
He finally receives from the Sheikh-ul-islam the diploma of
candidate (mulasim) and can be elevated to the rank of the
ulemas; he may become cadi (judge). To advance further he must
study for seven years, when he may become imam of a mosque. The
ulemas wear a white turban, the hadjis, who have been at Mecca,
have the green turban. The mesjids are simple places of prayer.
In a large mosque or djami maybe found sheikhs in charge of the
preaching; kiatibs, who direct the Friday prayer; imams, charged
with the ordinary service of the mosque (daily prayer,
marriages, burials); muezzins, who ascend four times a day to
the minaret to call the faithful to prayer; kaims, a kind of
sacristan. Several orders of dervishes form the regular clergy
and devote themselves to special practices of which some are
noted for their extravagance (howling and whirling); they are
distinguished by a conical felt hat. The principal religious
obligations, which the faithful perform with zeal are: prayer
four times daily, the weekly Friday service, the observance of
Ramadan (abstinence from eating, drinking, and smoking from the
rising to the setting of the sun). Islam is going through a
crisis by contact with the Western world, and under the
influence of Christianity many of the enlightened Turks dream of
reforming its morals. On the other hand there has always been a
certain opposition between the Arabs, who pretend to represent
the pure Mussulman tradition, and the Turks. The pan-lslamic
policy of Abdul-Hamid had weakened this opposition, and he had
availed himself of his title of caliph to form relations with
Mussulmans of the entire world.
To-day the pan-Islamist movement, of which the University of
El-Azhar at Cairo is one of the principal centres, and which has
numerous journals at its command, seems to be unfavourable to
the Turkish Caliphate. The society " Al Da' wat wal Irchad" is
about to create in Egypt a new university destined to form
Mussulman missionaries.
(2) Greek Orthodox Church
The principal indigenous Christian community is the Greek
Church, which is the survival of the religious organization of
the Byzantine Empire. Its head, the "OEcumenical Patriarch of
the Romans" (such is his official title), resides at
Constantinople, in the Phanar quarter. He presides over a Holy
Synod formed of twelve metropolitans and a "mixed council",
composed of four metropolitans and eight laymen. Two million
souls obey him. The oecumenical territory is divided into 100
eparchies or dioceses (83 metropolitans and 17 bishops). Since
the schisms of Photius (867) and of Michael Caerularius (1054),
the Greek Church has been separated from Rome by a succession of
ritual and disciplinary observances rather than by dogmatic
differences. The tendency of the Greek Church to autonomy has
brought about the crumbling of patriarchal authority and the
forming of autocephalous churches; outside of the Ottoman Empire
may be found the Russian Church, the Church of the Kingdom of
Greece, the Servian Church, the Church of Cyprus: in the empire,
even since the firman of Abdul-Aziz (11 March, 1870), the
Bulgarians have organized an independent church under the name
of "Exarchate". The Bulgarian Exarch resides at Orta-Keui on the
Bosporus and governs 3,000,000 souls; Thrace and Macedonia are
divided into 21 Bulgarian eparchies, but a Holy Synod resides at
Sofia. The Arabic speaking Syrians, or Melchites who are
attached to the Orthodox Church, are under the authority of the
Patriarch of Antioch, who resides at Damascus, of the Patriarchs
of Jerusalem and of Alexandria, and of the Archbishop of Sinai,
all independent of Constantinople.
The Greek Church has two divisions of clergy, one consisting of
the popes or papas, who marry before they take orders and cannot
become bishops; the other, called the upper clergy, chosen from
among the monks. The monasteries are quite numerous. Those of
Mount Athos form a veritable independent Republic composed of
twenty convents governed by the Council of the Holy Epistasia;
its head, the protepistates, is chosen in turn from the
monasteries of the great Laura, Iviron, Vatopedi, Khilandariou,
and Dyonisiou. The Greek Church has no organized missions, but
the Hellenic propaganda is maintained at least in the schools
throughout Macedonia, where there is antagonism between the
Greeks and Bulgarians: the latter have had often to defend their
religions and national independence against the former.
(3) Dissenting Churches
A certain number of religious communities represent the early
and schismatical heretical sects who have remained separate from
the Greek Church: a portion of these Christians have, however,
returned to the Catholic Church. The Gregorian Armenians (who
connect themselves with St. Gregory the Illuminator) have been
separated since the Council of Chalcedon (451). They have many
heads, the Catholicos of Etschmiadzin in Russian territory, the
Catholicos of Sis (200,000 faithful in Cilicia and Syria), and
the Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople, who is assisted by a
national assembly of 400 members and two councils, civil and
ecclesiastical (800,000 faithful, divided among 51 dioceses);
finally, the Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem, in communion with
Constantinople. On the Turco-Persian frontier may be found about
100,000 Nestorians, whose patriarch resides at Kotchanes; his
dignity is hereditary from uncle to nephew; many have been
reunited to the Roman Church. The Monophysites, or Jacobites, to
the number of 80,000 in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Kurdistan,
represent the remnants of a church that was once powerful; its
head, who calls himself Patriarch of Antioch, resides at the
Monastery of Dar-uz-Zafaran, between Diarbekir and Mardin.
(4) The Catholic Church in the Turkish Empire
The Catholic Church in the Turkish Empire comprises two classes
of faithful: those of the Latin Rite, and those who preserve
their traditional rites, and are united to the Holy See, whence
the name Greek-Uniats, Armenian-Uniats, etc. Turkey, a
missionary country, depends directly on the Congregation of the
Propaganda which has as representatives three apostolic
delegates, at Constantinople, Beirut, and Bagdad; assisting them
are vicars and prefects Apostolic, heads of the mission and
provided with episcopal powers (except the power of conferring
major orders). The Latin Catholics are scattered over the entire
empire, although 148,000 Albanians form an important group under
the Archbishops of Durazzo, Uskub, Scutari, and the Abbot of St.
Alexander of Orochi for the Mirdites.
The Uniats comprise many distinct groups: (a) the Greeks, whose
union was proclaimed by the Council of Florence in 1438, live in
Italy and Corsica (Albanian colony of Cargese). In the Turkish
Empire there are only some hundred or so placed under the
authority of the Apostolic delegate of Constantinople. Among the
popes who have striven most to bring about a union with the
Greeks Benedict XIV must be remembered, and Leo XIII (Encyclical
"Orientalium dignitas", 30 Nov., 1894). (b) The Melchite Greeks
(110,000), in Syria, Palestine, Egypt; their patriarch resides
at Damascus, and has under his jurisdiction three vicariates
(Tarsus, Damietta, and Palmyra) and eleven bishops. (c) The
Bulgarian-Uniats, converted about 1860 to escape from the
Phanariot despotism. There remain 13,000 directed by the
vicarsApostolic of Adrianople and Salonica. (d) The
Armenian-Uniats, organized since 1724 under the Patriarch of
Cilicia and Little Armenia, who reside at Zmar in the Lebanon.
ln 1857 Pius IX conferred this title on the Armenian Archbishop
of Constantinople (70,000 faithful, 2 archbishops, of Aleppo and
Sivas, 12 bishops, the most of whom are in Persia and Egypt).
(e) The Syrian-Uniats, converted by Latin missionaries in 1665;
a firman of 1830 has recognized its autonomy (40,000 faithful, a
patriarch residing at Beirut, and 12 dioceses). (f) The
Chaldean-Uniats, Nestorians converted to Catholicism in 1552.
Their Patriarch of Babylon resides at Mossoul (80,000 faithful).
(g) The Maronites of the ancient Lebanon, a Monothelite
community which abjured its heresy entirely in 1182. Its head,
Patriarch of Antioch, resides at Bekerkey, near Beirut; he has 7
archbishops under his jurisdiction. The 300,000 faithful have
remained particularly attached to Catholicism.
V. CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT MISSIONS
The Christian propaganda has been carried on in the Turkish
Empire by means of the missions, the oldest of which date back
to the time of the Crusades. As early as 1229 Franciscan and
Dominican missions were established in Palestine and as far as
Damascus. In 1328 the Franciscans received the "custody" of the
Holy Places, and constructed their convents of the Mount of
Sion, of the Holy Sepulchre, and of Bethlehem. To-day the
Franciscan custody of the Holy Land numbers 338 religious. The
missionaries have, however, encountered great obstacles in their
work, and they have been unable even to consider a direct
propaganda in regard to the Mussulmans. Nevertheless, their
moral influence is considerable; it manifests itself by social
works due to their initiative (schools, hospitals, dispensaries,
etc.) which are very prosperous, and are maintained by numerous
organizations founded in Europe: the Society of Foreign Missions
of Paris, founded in 1658; the Propagation of the Faith, founded
at Lyons in 1822; the Society of St. Francis Xavier, founded at
Aachen in the year 1832; the Leopoldsverein, founded in Austria
in 1839; the Society of the Holy Childhood, etc.
Among the religious orders represented in the Turkish Empire
must be mentioned: the Jesuits, who have established the
University of St Joseph of Beirut, whose faculty of letters
numbers distinguished Orientalists and epigraphists, and whose
school of medicine, placed under the control of the University
of France, forms a nursery for native physicians; it has a
library and a printing-press supplied with Latin and Arabic
characters; it publishes a journal and an Arabic review,
El-Bachir, and ElMachriq; the Assumptionists, at Constantinople;
many of whom devote themselves successfully to the study of
archaeology and Byzantine antiquities; the Brothers of the
Christian Schools, who had, in 1908, 3449 pupils (8 colleges at
Constantinople, 8 at Smyrna, others at Salonica, Angora etc.);
the Capuchins, established in Armenia, Asia Minor, Syria etc.;
the Lazarists, at Beirut; the Carmelites, at Bagdad, Tripoli,
etc.; the Salesians, in Palestine; the Sisters of St. Vincent de
Paul, who have opened in almost every district schools,
hospitals, and workshops, and who are respected by the
Mussulmans for their self-sacrifice; the Sisters of Notre Dame
of Sion, with schools in Constantinople; the Dominicans,
established at Mossoul and Jerusalem, with a Biblical school. In
1910 a normal school was established at Rhodes to educate
members of religious congregations to act as teachers in the
East.
All these missions are officially placed under the protectorate
of France. For the most part the missionaries are French, but
there are also a large number of Germans, Italians, and English.
Besides these Catholic missionaries, rival societies display
immense activity. First of all, the Jewish Alliance, which has
founded schools in most of the large cities; the Zionist
movement has for its object the repeopling of Palestine by Jews;
a few colonists have been attracted thither from Russia. There
are throughout the empire Protestant missions from England,
Germany, and America. In 1842 an Anglican bishopric was
established at Jerusalem, whose titular is alternately English
and German. All the large societies of Protestant missions are
represented in the Orient (American Board of Foreign Missions,
American U.P. Mission, Church Missionary Society, Deutsche
Orientmission, German Pioneer Mission, Evangelical Missionary
Society of Basle, etc.). All seek to establish their influence
by the same propaganda: distribution of Bibles and Gospels
translated into the native languages, hospitals, dispensaries,
schools etc. At Beirut there is an American University, and more
than 30 schools, comprising 3000 pupils. At Constantinople there
is the American Robert College.
DUTTAND, Empire Ottoman, Turquie d'Europe, Turguie d'Asie,
Nouvelle carte administrative, economique et consulaire (Paris,
1908); CUINET, La Turquie d'Asie (5 vols., Paris, 1891-94):
Syrie, Liban, Palestine (Paris, 1896-98); BERARD, La Turquie et
L'hellenisme contemporain (Paris, 1893); La revolution torque
(Paris, 1909); DURAND, Jeune Turquie, vieille France (Paris,
1909); PINON, L'Europe et l'empire ottoman (Paris, 1910);
IMBERT, La renovation de l'empire ottoman (Paris, 1909); VON
OPPENHEIM, Von Mittelmeer zum persischen Golfe (2 vols., Berlin,
1899-1900); MARK-SYKES, Dar-el-islam (London, 1903); TINAYRE,
Notes d'une voyageuse en Orient in Revue des deux Mondes
(July-Nov., 1909); Du RAUZAS, Le regime des capitulations dans
l'empire ottoman (2nd ed., Paris, 1910); JANIN, Les groupements
chretiens en Orient in Echos d'Orient (1906-07); FORTESCUE, The
Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1907); DE MEESTER, Voyage de
deux benedictins aux monasteres du mont Athos (Paris, 1908);
BERTRAND, La melee des religions en Orient in Revue des deux
Mondes (Oct., 1909); DOWLING, The patriarchate of Jerusalem
(London, 1909); JEHAY, De la situation legale des sujets
ottomans non musulmans (Brussels, l9O6); BERTRAND, Les ecoles
d'Orient in Revue des deux Mondes (Sept., Oct., 1909); Carte des
ecoles chretiennes de Macedoine (Paris, 1905); LOUVET, Les
missions catholiques au XIX siecle (Lyons, 1900); KROSE,
Katholische Missionsstaistik (1908); STREIT, Katholischen
Missionatlas (1908); BERRE, L'action sociale des missionnaires
et les dominicains francais en Turqizie d'Asie (Paris, 1910);
Les massacres d'Adana et nos missionnaires (Lyons, 1909);
NOPCSA, A Katolikus Eszak-Albania, XXXV (Foldrajzi Kozlemenyek,
1907); MALDEN, Foreign missions (London, 1907); BLISS, DWIGHT,
AND TUPPER, The Encyclopedia of missions (2nd ed., London,
1904); BLISS, The missionary enterprise (2nd ed., New York,
1911); WHERRY AND BARTON, The Mohammedan World of To-day (New
York, 1911).
Periodicals: Missiones Catholicoe cura S. Congregationis de
Propaganda Fide descriptoe (Rome); Revue du Monde musulman
(Paris; see Nov., 1911, La conquete du monde musulman); Echos
d'Orient (Paris, 1897--). BEACH, Statistical atlas of missions
(London and New York, 1910); HUBER, Carte statistique des Cultes
chretiens: I, Turquie d'Europe; II, Turquie d'Asie (Cairo,
1910-11).
LOUIS BREHIER
Adrian Turnebus
Adrian Turnebus
Philologist, b. at Andely in Normandy in 1512; d. in Paris, 12
June, 1565. The accounts of the life of the great scholar are
scanty and in part even contradictory. Neither is it easy to
interpret the name Turnebus, in French Turnebe. It is said that
his father was a Scottish gentleman named Turnbull, who settled
in Normandy and gave his name the French form of Tournebaeuf.
From this it became Tournebu, then Turnebe, in Latin Turnebus.
Whatever may have been the derivation of his name, Turnebus came
from a noble though poor family. When eleven years old he was
sent to Paris to study. Here his ability and industry enabled
him not only to surpass his fellow-pupils but even also his
teachers. In 1532 he received the degree of Master of Arts at
the University of Paris, and one year later he became professor
of humanities at Toulouse. Having held this position for
fourteen years, he next became professor of Greek at Paris, and
in 1561 exchanged this professorship for that of Greek
philosophy. For a time (1552-55) he and his friend William Morel
supervised the royal printing press for Greek works. It is said,
and can easily be believed of so distinguished a scholar, that
important professorships in other places were declined by him
while he taught at Paris. As an illustration of his remarkable
industry a well-authenticated story is told, that he devoted
several hours to study even on his wedding-day. Over-study,
however, wore out his strength prematurely, and he died at the
age of fifty-three. In accordance with his own testamentary
directions, his body was placed in the ground without any
religious ceremony on the very evening of his death. This
curious proceeding, as well as various utterances and a severe
poem on the Jesuits, raised the much controverted question,
whether Turnebus remained a Catholic or became an adherent of
the new heresy. It seems at least probable that he inclined to
Protestant views, even though he did not break completely with
the Church, as his Catholic friends steadily maintained. In
other respects his character was blameless. His reputation rests
not only on his lectures, but also in equal measure on his
writings. His numerous works, including commentaries on the
ancient classics, short treatises, and poems, were collected and
published (2 vols., Strasburg, 1600) with the co-operation of
his three sons.
De Thou, Histoire universelle; JOecher, Allg. Gelehrten-Lexikon;
Iselin, Neu vermehrtes histor. u. geographisches Lexikon, VI.
N. SCHEID
Turpin
Turpin
Archbishop of Reims, date of birth uncertain; d. 2 Sept., 800.
He was a monk of St. Denis when, about 753, he was called to the
See of Reims. With eleven other bishops of France he attended
the Council of Rome in which Pope Stephen III condemned the
antipope Constantine to perpetual confinement. He enriched the
library of his cathedral by having numerous works copied, and
obtained from Charlemagne several privileges for his diocese.
Legends grew up around his life, so that by degrees he becomes
an epic character who figures in numerous chansons de geste,
especially in the "Chanson de Roland". Furthermore, a chronicle
known as the "Historia Karoli Magni et Rotholandi" has been
attributed to him; but that he was not the author is proved by
the use in the chronicle of the word "Lotharingia" which did not
exist prior to 855, the mention of the musical chant written on
four lines, a custom which does not date back further than 1022,
and finally the silence of all the writers of the ninth and
tenth centuries regarding this so-called book of Turpin's. The
first to mention him is Raoul de Tortaine, a monk of Fleury, who
wrote from 1096 to 1145. At the same time Calistus II regarded
the book as authentic, and its diffusion revived the fervour of
the pilgrimages to St. James of Compostella. In it is related an
apparition of St. James to Charlemagne; the saint orders the
emperor to follow with his army the direction of the Milky Way,
which was thenceforth called the "Path of St. James". Gaston
Paris considers that the first five chapters of the chronicle
attributed to Turpin were written about the middle of the
eleventh century by a monk of Compostella, and that the
remainder were written between 1109 and 1119 by a monk of St.
AndrE de Vienne. This second part has a real literary
importance, for the monk who wrote it derived his inspiration
from the chansons de geste and the epic traditions; hence there
may be seen in this compilation a very ancient form of these
traditions. The chronicle was translated into Latin and French
as early as 1206 by the cleric Jehan, in the service of Renaud
de Dammartin, Count of Boulogne. Editions according to various
MSS. have been issued at Paris by Castets (1880) and at Lund by
Wulff (1881).
Gaston Paris, De pseudo Turpino (Paris, 1865); Auracher, Der
altfranzoesische Pseudo-Turpin der Arsenalhandschrift in
Romanische Forschungen, V (1889-90); Fisquet, La France
potificale: Reims (Paris, 1864).
GEORGES GOYAU
Tuscany
Tuscany
Tuscany, a division of central Italy, includes the provinces of
Arezzo, Florence, Grosseto, Livorno, Massa and Carrara, Pisa,
and Siena; area, 9304 sq. miles; population in 1911, 2,900,000.
Ecclesiastically it is divided into the provinces of Florence,
with 6 suffragan dioceses; Pisa, with 4 suffragans; Siena, with
5 suffragans, the Archdiocese of Lucca; and the immediate
Dioceses of Arezzo, Cortona, Montalcino, Montepulciano, and
Pienza. The territory is essentially the same as that of ancient
Etruria. In the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. the Etruscans
were the dominant power in northern and central Italy, and
brought Latium and Rome under their supremacy. Towards the end
of the sixth century B.C. Rome regained its independence, and
from the second half of the fifth century it began a struggle
for supremacy. There were many changes of fortune during the
long war, but it ended about 280 B.C. with the overthrow of
Etruria. During the Empire Etruria formed the seventh region of
Italy. After the fall of the Western Empire, Tuscany was ruled
successively by the Germans under Odoacer, by the Ostrogoths, by
the Eastern Empire through Narses, and by the Lombards. Tuscany,
or Tuscia as it was called in the Middle Ages, became a part of
the Frankish Empire. during the reign of Charlemagne and was
formed a margravate, the margrave of which was also made the
ruler several times of the Duchy of Spoleto and Camerino. In
1030 the margravate fell to Boniface, of the Canossa family.
Boniface was also Duke of Spoleto, Count of Modena, Mantua, and
Ferrara, and was the most powerful prince of the empire in
Italy. He was followed by his wife Beatrice, first as regent for
their minor son who died in 1055, then as regent for their
daughter Matilda; in 1076 Beatrice died. Both she and her
daughter were enthusiastic adherents of Gregory VII in his
contest with the empire, After Matilda's death in 1115 her
hereditary possessions were for a long time an object of strife
between the papacy and the emperors.
During the years 1139-45 Tuscany was ruled by Margrave
Hulderich, who was appointed by the Emperor Conrad III.
Hulderich was followed by Guelf, brother of Henry the Lion. In
1195 the Emperor Henry VI gave the margravate in fief to his
brother Philip. In 12O9 Otto IV renounced in favour of the
papacy all claim to Matilda's lands, as did also the Emperor
Frederick II in the Golden Bull of Eger of 1213, but both firmly
maintained the rights of the empire in the Tuscan cities. During
the struggle between the popes and the emperors' and in the
period following the fall of the Hohenstaufens when the throne
was vacant, Florence, Siena, Pisa, Lucca, Arezzo, and other
Tuscan cities attained constantly increasing independence and
autonomy. They acquired control also of Matilda's patrimony, so
far as it was situated in Tuscany. In the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries all Tuscany, except Siena and Lucca, came
under the suzerainty of Florence and the Medici. In 1523 the
Emperor Charles V made Alessandro Medici hereditary Duke of
Florence. The last Tuscan towns that still enjoyed independence
were acquired by Alessandro's successor Cosimo I (1537-74)
partly by cunning and bribery, partly with Spanish aid by force
of arms. In 1557 Philip II, who required Cosimo's aid against
the pope, granted him Siena which in 1555 had surrendered to the
emperor. Only a small part of Sienese territory remained Spanish
as the Stato degli presidi. Thus the Medici acquired the whole
of Tuscany, and in 1569 the pope made Cosimo Grand Duke of
Tuscany. Although at the beginning of Cosimo's reign there were
several conspiracies, especially by the exiled families, the
Fuorisciti, the Florentines gradually became accustomed to the
absolute government of the ruler. Cosimo had created a
well-ordered state out of the chaos existing previously, and had
established this state on the foundation of justice, equality of
all citizens, good financial administration, and sufficient
military strength. Art, literature, and learning also enjoyed a
new era of prosperity during his reign. After long negotiations
his son Francesco I (1574-87) received in 1576 from the Emperor
Maximilian the confirmation of the grand ducal title which had
been refused his father. In his foreign policy Francesco was
dependent on the Habsburg dynasty. During his weak reign the
power was in the hands of women and favourites, and the
corruption of the nobility and officials gained ground again,
while the discontent of the common people was increased by heavy
taxes. After the death of his first wife the grand duke married
his mistress, the Venetian Bianca Capello. As he had only
daughters, one of whom was the French queen, Maria de Medici,
and the attempt to substitute an illegitimate son failed, he was
followed by his brother Cardinal Ferdinand (1587-1605, who has
been accused without any historical proof of poisoning his
brother and sister-in-law.
In foreign policy Ferdinand made himself independent of the
emperor and Spain and as an opponent of the preponderance of the
Habsburgs supported the French King Henry IV. Henry's return to
the Catholic Church was largely due to Ferdinand's influence.
Ferdinand benefited his duchy by an excellent administration and
large public works, e.g. the draining of the Mianatales and the
Maremma of Siena, the construction of the port of Leghorn, etc.
He re-established public safety by repressing brigandage. In
1589 he resigned the cardinalate with the consent of Sixtus V,
and married Christine, daughter of Henry III of France. His
relations with the papacy were almost always of the best; he
promoted the reform of the Tuscan monasteries and the execution
of the decrees of the Council of Trent. His son Cosimo II
(1609-21) married Margareta, sister of the Emperor Ferdinand II.
Cosimo II ruled in the same spirit as his father and raised the
prosperity of the country to a height never before attained. He
was succeeded by a minor son of eleven years, Ferdinand II
(1621-70), the regent being the boy's mother. Margareta's
weakness led to the loss of Tuscany's right to the Duchy of
Urbino, which fell vacant, and which Pope Urban VII took as an
unoccupied fief of the Church. From 1628 Ferdinand ruled
independently; to the disadvantage of his country he formed a
close union with the Habsburg dynasty which involved him in a
number of Italian wars. These wars, together with pestilence,
were most disastrous to the country. Cosimo III (1670-1723)
brought the country to the brink of ruin by his unlucky policy
and his extravagance. His autocratic methods, inconsistency, and
preposterous measures in internal affairs place upon him the
greater part of the responsibility for the extreme arbitrariness
that developed among the state officials, especially among those
of the judiciary. Although he sought to increase the importance
of the Church, yet he damaged it by using the clergy for police
purposes, proceeded against heretics with undue severity, and
sought to aid the conversion of non-Catholics and Jews by all
means, even, very material ones. During the War of the Spanish
Succession the grand duke desired to remain neutral, although he
had accepted Siena in fief once more from Philip V. In this era
the land was ravaged by pestilence, and the war-taxes and forced
contributions levied on it by the imperial generals completely
destroyed its prosperity. Neither of Cosimo's two sons had male
heirs, and finally he obstinately pursued the plan, although
without success, to transfer the succession to his daughter.
Before this, however, the powers had settled in the Peace of
Utrecht that when the Medici were extinct the succession to
Tuscany was to fall to the Spanish Bourbons. Cosimo III was
followed by his second son Giovan Gastone (1723-37), who
permitted the country to be governed by his unscrupulous
chamberlain, Giuliano Dami. When he died the Medici dynasty
ended.
In accordance with the Treaty of Vienna of 1735 Francis, Duke of
Lorraine, who had married Maria Theresa in 1736, became grand
duke (1737-65) instead of the Spanish Bourbons. Francis Joseph
garrisoned the country with Austrian troops and transferred its
administration to imperial councillors. As Tuscany now became an
Austrian territory, belonging as inheritance to the second son,
Tuscany was more or less dependent upon Vienna. However, the
country once more greatly advanced in economic prosperity,
especially during the reign of Leopold I (1765-90), who, like
his brother the Emperor Joseph I, was full of zeal for reform,
but who went about it more slowly and cautiously. In 1782
Leopold suppressed the Inquisition, reduced the possessions of
the Church, suppressed numerous monasteries, and interfered in
purely internal ecclesiastical matters for the benefit of the
Jansenists. After his election as emperor he was succeeded in
1790 by his second son, Ferdinand III, who ruled as his father
had done. During the French Revolution Ferdinand lost his duchy
in 1789 and 1800; it was given to Duke Louis of Parma on 1
October, under the name of the Kingdom of Etruria. In 1807
Tuscany was united directly with the French Empire, and Napoleon
made his sister Eliza Bacciocchi its administrator with the
title of grand duchess. After Napoleon's overthrow the Congress
of Vienna gave Tuscany again to Ferdinand and added to it Elba,
Piombino, and the Stato degli presidi. A number of the
monasteries suppressed by the French were re-established by the
Concordat of 1815 but otherwise the government was influenced by
the principles of Josephinism in its relations with the Catholic
Church. When the efforts of the Italian secret societies for the
formation of a united national state spread to Tuscany,
Ferdinand formed a closer union with Austria, and the Tuscan
troops were placed under Austrian officers as preparation for
the breaking-out of war. The administration of his son Leopold
II (1824-60) was long considered the most liberal in Italy,
although he reigned as an absolute sovereign. The Concordat of
1850 also gave the Church greater liberty. Notwithstanding the
economic and intellectual growth which the land enjoyed, the
intrigues of the secret societies found the country fruitful
soil, for the rulers were always regarded as foreigners, and the
connection they formed with Austria made them unpopular.
In 1847 a state council was established; on 15 Feb., 1848, a
constitution was issued, and on 26 June was opened.
Notwithstanding this, the sedition against the dynasty
increased, and in August there were street fights at Leghorn in
which the troops proved untrustworthy. Although Leopold had
called a democratic ministry in October, with Guerrazzi and
Montanelli at its head, and had taken part in the Piedmontese
war against Austria, yet the Republicans forced him to flee from
the country and go to Gaeta in Feb., 1849. A provisional
republican government was established at Florence; this before
long was forced to give way to an opposing movement of moderated
Liberalism. After this by the aid of Austria Leopold was able in
July, 1849, to return. In 1852 he suppressed the constitution
issued in 1848 and governed as an absolute ruler, although with
caution and moderation. However, the suppression of the
constitution and the fact that up to 1855 an Austrian army of
occupation remained in the country made him greatly disliked.
When in 1859 war was begun between Sardinia-Piedmont and
Austria, and Leopold became the confederate of Austria, a fresh
revolution broke out which forced him to leave. For the period
of the war Victor Emmanuel occupied the country. After the Peace
of Villa Franca had restored Tuscany to Leopold, the latter
abdicated in favour of his son Ferdinand IV. On 16 Aug., 1859, a
national assembly declared the deposition of the dynasty, and a
second assembly (12 March, 1860) voted for annexation to
Piedmont, officially proclaimed on 22 March. Since then Tuscany
has been a part of the Kingdom of Italy, whose capital was
Florence from 1865 to 1871.
GALLUZZI, Storia del granducato di Toscana sotto il governo
della casa Medici (5th ed., 18 vols., Florence, 1830); NAPIER,
Florentine History (6 vols. London, 1847); ZOBI, Storia civile
della Toscana (5 vols. Florence, 1850-52); IDEM, Memorie e
documenti officiali (2 vols., Florence, 1860); IDEM, Cronaca
degli avvenimenti nel 1859 (2 vols., Florence, 1859-60);
Giornale storico degli archivi toscani (7 vols., Florence,
1857-68; CANESTRINI, Negociations diplontatiques de la France
avec la Toscane, ed. DESJARDINS (6 vols., Paris, 1859-86);
POGGI, Memorie storiche del governo della Toscana 1859-60 (3
vols., Pisa, 1871); Leopoldo II e i suoi tempi (Florence, 1871);
REUMONT, Geschichte Toscanas (2 vols., Gotha, 1876-77);
REUCHLIN, Geschichte Italiens, III-IV (Leizig, 1870-73); ROHAULT
DE LA FLEURY, La Toscane au moyen age (2 vols., Paris, 1874);
MERKEL, Bibliografia degli anni 1859-91 in Bulletino storico
italiano (1892); WURZBACH, Die Grossherzoege von Tosk (Vienna,
1883); MUeNTZ, Florence et la Toscane (2nd ed. Paris, 1901).
JOSEPH LINS
Tuy
Tuy
(Tudensis.)
Suffragan diocese of the Archdiocese of Santiago, comprises the
civil provinces of Orense and Pontevedra, is bounded on the
north by Pontevedra, on the east by Orense, on the south by
Portugal, and on the west by the Atlantic Ocean. The city has a
population of 3000, and is of very ancient origin. Ptolemy calls
it Toudai and attributes its foundation to Diomedes, son of
Tydeus (just as the foundation of Lisbon is attributed to
Ulysses). During the Roman period it belonged to the conventus
juridicus or judicial district of Braga. The city seems to have
been at first situated on the top of Mount Alhoya whence it was
moved to its base, where it was in the time of the Goths. When
King Egica shared the government with his son Wittiza he made
him live at Tuy, probably at the site known as Pazos de Reyes
(palaces of the kings). The See of Tuy is very ancient; one of
the four bishops of Galicia at the first Council of Braga (561)
was Bishop of Tuy. The first historically known bishop was Anila
who attended the second Council of Braga (572); he signed as
suffragan of Lugo. Neuphilias lived under the Arian King
Leovigild, by whom he was exiled and the Arian Gardingus put in
his place. Gardingus abjured his heresy at the third Council of
Toledo. Anastasius was present at the fourth and sixth Councils
of Toledo; Adimirus at the seventh; and Beatus sent the cleric
Victorinus to represent him at the eighth. Genetivus was present
at the third Council of Braga (675) as a suffragan of Braga, and
also at the twelfth Council of Toledo. Oppa was present at the
thirteenth, and Adelphius at the fifteenth.
Tuy fell into the hands of the Mahommedans, but was not entirely
destroyed as it is numbered among the cities reconquered by
Alfonso I, but not recolonized until the time of Ordono I. The
exiled Bishop of Tuy took refuge in Iria (Compostella), and a
parish was assigned to him for his support. The first known
Bishop of Tuy after the Saracen invasion is Diego (890-901),
present at the consecration of the Church of St. James the
Apostle (899), also at the Council of Oviedo in which this see
was raised to the rank of a metropolitan (900). Hermoigius
founded the monastery of San Cristobal of Labrugia, resided in
Tuy, and in 915 began the reconstruction of the cathedral. At
the battle of Valdejunquera he was made prisoner by the Arabs
and taken to Cordova where he was forced to leave as a hostage
his nephew, St. Pelagius, a child of thirteen. The latter
suffered martyrdom in defence of his chastity; his relics were
transferred to Oviedo and he was declared the patron of Tuy.
Naustianus (926) retired to the monastery of Labrugia to avoid
the assaults of the Norsemen who had come up as far as Tuy along
the River Mino. His successor, Vimaranus (937-42), retired to
the monastery Rivas de Sil, as did the next bishop, Viliulfus
(952-70). The Norsemen led by Olaf were encamped at different
times at Tuy and ravaged it cruelly (1014), on which account
Alfonso V placed it under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of
Compostella. Bishop Alfonso I and his priests had been made
captive, and thereafter, until the time of Dona Urraca, a sister
of Alfonso VI, a period of forty-seven years, the See of Tuy was
vacant. Dona Urraca re-established it and made Jorge (Georgius)
bishop. He took up his residence in the monastery of San
Bartolome, whose monks were canons of the cathedral. The decree
of the restoration of the see is dated 13 Jan., 1071. Bishop
Adericus (1072-95) succeeded Jorge. The bishops, by concession
of Raymond of Burgundy and Alfonso VII, were lords of the city,
and Bishop Alfonso II began building the new cathedral, which
was finished a hundred years later by Esteban Egea (1218-39). In
the time of Bishop Pelayo Melendez (1131-55) the canons adopted
the Rule of St. Augustine. Among the bishops who deserve special
mention are: Lucas de Tuy, called "El Tudense", annalist of Dona
Berenguela, to whom we owe the compilation known as the
"Cronicon de Espana"; Juan Fernandez de Sotomayor, councillor of
Queen Dona Maria de Molina, who was present at the Council of
Vienna (1312); and Prudencio de Sandoval, a Benedictine,
celebrated annalist of Charles V.
The Western Schism caused a division in the ranks of the clergy
of Tuy, the bishop giving allegiance to the Avignon pope, others
to the pope at Rome, whom Portugual also obeyed. Martin V
commanded the latter to recognize the legitimate bishop, and
when some resisted this order their churches were allowed to be
governed by vicars residing in Portugal (1441). The cathedral of
the diocese, which is dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, resembles
a medieval fortress, as it is built on the crown of the ancient
castle fort (Castellum Tude). It belongs to the early Gothic
period and, on account of its height, the importance of its side
naves, its clerestory (now walled up, but preserving its ancient
arches and columns), the interior is well worthy of note. The
ground plan is that of a Latin cross (the four arms being
extremely short) with four naves, those on the side terminating
in the apse. The chapel of San Telmo (San Pedro Gonzalez), built
by Bishop Diego de Torquemada (1564-82) who transferred to it
the relics of the saint, is worthy of note. Between the altar of
the Visitation and that of the Seven Dolours is the unique
sepulchre of Lope de Sarmiento (d. 1607). To the cathedral is
attached a handsome Gothic cloister. The churches of the old
Dominican and Franciscan convents have been converted into
parish churches, the convent of Santo Domingo being used for a
barracks and that of San Francisco for primary and secondary
schools. Tuy has a fine hospital (built by Bishop Rodriguez
Castanon) and a home for the aged in charge of the Little
Sisters of the Poor. The seminary, which is dedicated to St.
Francis of Assisi and the Immaculate Conception, was founded in
1850 by Bishop Francisco Garcia Casarrubios y Melgar. Among the
illustrious men of the diocese may be mentioned St. Teutonius,
the humanist Alvaro Cadaval y Sotomayor, and Francisco Avila y
La Creva, author of a history of the diocese.
Florez, Esp. Sagrada, XXII-XXIII (Madrid, 1798-99); Marguia,
Esp., sus monumentos: Galicia (Barcelona, 1888); Davila, Teatro
ecles. de Tuy; Sandoval y Argaiz, Episcopologios.
RAMON RUIZ AMADO
St. John Twenge
St. John Twenge
Last English saint canonized, canon regular, Prior of St.
Mary's, Bridlington, b. near the town, 1319; d. at Bridlington,
1379. He was of the Yorkshire family Twenge, which family in
Reformation days supplied two priest-martyrs and was also
instrumental in establishing the Institute of the Blessed Virgin
Mary (q. v.) at Bar Convent, York. John completed his studies at
Oxford and then entered the Priory of Bridlington. Charged
successively with various offices in the community, he was
finally despite his reluctance elected prior, which office he
held until his death. Even in his lifetime he enjoyed a
reputation for great holiness and for miraculous powers. On one
occasion he changed water into wine. On another, five seamen
from Hartlepool in danger of shipwreck called upon God in the
name of His servant, John of Bridlington, whereupon the prior
himself appeared to them in his canonical habit and brought them
safely to shore. After his death the fame of the miracles
wrought by his intercession spread rapidly through the land.
Archbishop Neville charged his suffragans and others to take
evidence with a view to his canonization, 26 July, 1386; and the
same prelate assisted by the Bishops of Durham and Carlisle
officiated at a solemn translation of his body, 11 March, 1404,
de mandato Domini Papae. This pope, Boniface IX, shortly
afterwards canonized him. The fact has been doubted and
disputed; but the original Bull was recently unearthed in the
Vatican archives by Mr. T.A. Twemlow, who was engaged in
research work there for the British Government. St. John was
especially invoked by women in cases of difficult confinement.
At the Reformation the people besought the royal plunderer to
spare the magnificent shrine of the saint, but in vain; it was
destroyed in 1537. The splendid nave of the church, restored in
1857, is all that now remains of Bridlington Priory. The saint's
feast is observed by the canons regular on 9 October.
BUTLER, Lives of the Saints; GASQUET, Henry VIII and the English
Monasteries (London, 1889); STANTON, Menology (London and New
York, 1892); State Papers, Rolls Series, Northern Registers;
WALSINGHAM, Historia Anglicana (London, 1863-76); SURIUS, De
probatis Sanctorum Historiis (Turin, 1875-80).
VINCENT SCULLY
Twiketal of Croyland
Twiketal of Croyland
(THURCYTEL, TURKETUL).
Died July, 975. He was a cleric of royal descent, who is said to
have acted as chancellor to Kings Athelstan (d. 940), Edmund (d.
946), and Edred (d. 955), but as this statement rests on the
authority of the pseudo-Ingulf, it must be received with
caution. Leaving the world in 946 he became a monk of Croyland
Abbey, which had been devastated by the Danes and lay in a
ruinous and destitute state. He endowed it with six of his own
manors, and, being elected abbot, restored the house to a
flourishing condition. He was a friend both of St. Dunstan and
St. Ethelwold of Winchester, and like them a reformer. The real
authority for his life is Ordericus Vitalis; for no reliance can
be placed on the long and fictitious account in the
fourteenth-century forgery which is published under the name of
Ingulf of Croyland (q.v.).
EDWIN BURTON
Tyana
Tyana
A titular metropolitan see of Cappadocia Prima. The city must
first have been called Thoana, because Thoas, a Thracian king,
was its founder (Arrianus, "Periplus Ponti Euxini", vi); it was
in Cappadocia, but at the foot of Taurus and near the Cilician
Gates (Strabo, XII, 537; XIII, 587). The surrounding plain
received the name of Tyanitis. There in the first century A.D.
was born the celebrated magician Apollonius. Under Caracalla the
city became the "Antoniana colonia Tyana". After having taken
sides with Queen Zenobia of Palmyra it was captured by Aurelian
in 272, who would not allow his soldiers to pillage it (Homo,
"Essai sur le regne de l'Empereur Aurelien", 90-92). In 371
Valens created a second province of Cappadocia, of which Tyana
became the metropolis, which aroused a violent controversy
between Anthimus, Bishop of Tyana, and St. Basil, Bishop of
Caesarea, each of whom wished to have as many suffragan sees as
possible. About 640 Tyana had three, and it was the same in the
tenth century (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . . Texte der Notitiae
episcopatum", 538, 554). Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 395- 402)
mentions 28 bishops of Tyana, among whom were Eutychius, at Nice
in 325; Anthimus, the rival of St. Basil; Aetherius, at
Constantinople in 381; Theodore, the friend of St. John
Chrysostom; Eutherius, the partisan of Nestorius, deposed and
exiled in 431; Cyriacus, a Severian Monophysite. In May, 1359,
Tyana still had a metropolitan (Mikelosich and Mueller, "Acta
patriarchatus Constantinopolitani", I, 505); in 1360 the
metropolitan of Caesarea secured the administration of it (op.
cit., 537). Thenceforth the see was titular. The ruins of Tyana
are at Kilisse-Hissar, three miles south of Nigde in the vilayet
of Koniah; there are remains of a Roman aqueduct and of
sepulchral grottoes.
S. VAILHE
St. Tychicus
St. Tychicus
A disciple of St. Paul and his constant companion. He was a
native of the Roman province of Asia (Acts, xx, 4), born,
probably, at Ephesus. About his conversion nothing is known. He
appears as a companion of St. Paul in his third missionary
journey from Corinth through Macedonia and Asia Minor to
Jerusalem. He shared the Apostle's first Roman captivity and was
sent to Asia as the bearer of letters to the Colossians and
Ephesians (Eph., vi, 21; Col, iv, 7, 8). According to Tit., iii,
12, Paul intended to send Tychicus or Artemas to Crete to supply
the place of Titus. It seems, however, that Artemas was sent,
for during the second captivity of St. Paul at Rome Tychicus was
sent thence to Ephesus (II Tim., iv, 12). Of the subsequent
career of Tychicus nothing certain is known. Several cities
claim him as their bishop. The Menology of Basil
Porphyrogenitus, which commemorates him on 9 April, makes him
Bishop of Colophon and successor to Sosthenes. He is also said
to have been appointed Bishop of Chalcedon by St. Andrew the
Apostle (Lipsius, "Apokryphe Apostelgesch.", Brunswick, 1883,
579). He is also called bishop of Neapolis in Cyprus (Le Quien,
"Oriens christ.", Paris, 1740, I, 125; II, 1061). Some
martyrologies make him a deacon, while the Roman Martyrology
places his commemoration at Paphos in Cyprus. His feast is kept
on 29 April.
FRANCIS MERSHMAN
Tynemouth Priory
Tynemouth Priory
Tynemouth Priory, on the east coast of Northumberland, England,
occupied the site of an earlier Saxon church built first in
wood, then in stone, in the seventh century, and famous as the
burial-place of St. Oswin, king and martyr. Plundered and burnt
several times by the Danes, and frequently rebuilt, it was
granted in 1074 to the Benedictine monks of Yarrow, and, with
them, annexed to Durham Abbey. In the reign of William Rufus,
Robert de Mowbray, Earl of Northumberland, re-peopled Tynemouth
with monks from St. Albans, and it became a cell of that abbey,
remaining so until the Dissolution. The Norman Church of Sts.
Mary and Oswin was built by Earl Robert about 1100, and 120
years later was greatly enlarged, a choir 135 feet long with
aisles being added beyond the Norman apse, while the nave was
also lengthened. East of the choir and chancel was added about
1320 an exquisite Lady-chapel, probably built by the Percy
family, which had lately acquired the great Northumberland
estates of the de Vescis. The first prior of the re-founded
monastery was Remigius, and the last was Robert Blakeney, who on
12 Jan., 1539, surrendered the priory to Henry VIII, he himself,
with fifteen monks and four novices, signing the deed of
surrender, which is still extant, with the beautiful seal of the
monastery appended to it. A pension of -L-80 was granted to
Blakeney, and small pittances to the monks; and the priory site
and buildings were bestowed first on Sir Thomas Hilton, and
later, under Edward VI, on the Duke of Northumberland. Colonel
Villars, governor of Tynemouth Castle under William III and
Anne, had a lease of the priory, and id irreparable damage to
the remaining buildings. Practically nothing is now left except
the roofless chancel, one of the most beautiful fragments of
thirteenth-century architecture in England.
D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR
Types in Scripture
Types in Scripture
Types, though denoted by the Greek word typoi, are not
coextensive with the meaning of this word. It signifies in John
20:25, the "print" of the nails in the risen Lord's hands; in
Romans 6:17, the "form" of the Christian doctrine; in Acts 7:43,
"figures" formed by a blow or impression, "images" of idols made
for adoration; in Acts 7:44, and Hebrews 8:5, the "form", or
"pattern", according to which something is to be made; in
Philippians 3:17, I Timothy 4:12, etc., the "model" or "example"
of conduct. It is to be noted that, in all instances in which
the word typos indicates the similarity between something future
and something past in either the physical or the moral order,
this similarity is intended, and not a matter of chance
resemblance. It is, therefore, antecedently probable that in
another series of texts, e.g. Romans 5:14, in which a type is a
person or thing prefiguring a future person or thing, the
connection between the two terms is intended by him who foresees
and arranges the course of history. The types in the Bible are
limited to types understood in this sense of the word. But while
they do not extend to all the various meanings of the word
typos, they are not restricted to its actual occurrence. In
Galatians 4:24, for instance, the type and its antitype are
represented as allegoroumena, "said by an allegory"; in
Colossians 2:17, the type is said to be skia ton mellonton "a
shadow of things to come"; in Hebrews 9:9, it is called
parabole, a "parable" of its antitype. But the definition of the
type is verified in all these cases: a person, a thing, or an
action, having its own independent and absolute existence, but
at the same time intended by God to prefigure a future person,
thing, or action.
I. NATURAL BASIS OF TYPES
It has been pointed out that in the various degrees of nature
the higher forms repeat the laws of the lower forms in a clearer
and more perfect way. In history, too, the past and present
often resemble each other to such an extent that some writers
regard it as an axiom that history repeats itself. They point to
Nabuchodonosor and Napoleon, to the fleet of Xerxes and the
armada of Philip. After Plutarch has informed his reader (De
fortuna Alexandri, x) that among all the expressions of Homer
the words "both a good king, and an excellent fighter in war"
pleased Alexander most, he adds that in this verse Homer seems
not merely to celebrate the greatness of Agamemnon but also to
prophesy that of Alexander. What is true of nature and history
in general is especially applicable to the economy of salvation;
the state of nature was superseded and surpassed in perfection
by the Mosaic Law, and the Mosaic Law yielded similarly to the
Christian dispensation.
II. FIGURISTS
In the two earlier periods of Revelation there is no lack of
men, things, and actions resembling those of the Christian
economy; besides, the New Testament expressly declares that some
of them typify their respective resemblances in the new
dispensation. Hence the question arises whether one is justified
in affirming to be a type anything which is not affirmed to be
so in Revelation, either by direct statement or manifest
implication. Witsius Cocceius (d. 1669) were of opinion that the
types actually indicated in Revelation were to be considered
rather as examples for our guidance in the interpretation of
others than as supplying us with an entire list of all that were
designed for this purpose. Cocceius and his followers contended
that every event in Old Testament history which had any formal
resemblance to something in the New was to be regarded as
typical. This view opened the door to frivolous and absurd
interpretation by the followers of the Cocceian and Witsian
school. Cramer, for instance, in his "De ara exteriori" (xii, 1)
considers the altar of holocausts as a type of Christ, and then
asks the question, "quadratus quomodo Christus fuerit"; van Till
(De tabernaculo Mosis, xxv) presents the snuffers of the sacred
candlestick as a type of sanctified reason which destroys our
daily occurring errors. Hulsius, d'Outrein, Deusing, and
Vitringa (d. 1722) belong to the same school.
III. PIETISTS
In the Wuertemberg school of pietism the types of the Old
Testament were no longer considered an isolated phenomena,
intended to instruct and confirm in the faith, but were regarded
as members of an organic development of the salvific economy in
which each earlier stage prefigures the subsequent. Bengel
points out (Gnomon, preface, 13) that as there is symmetry in
God's works down to the tiniest blade of grass, so there is a
connection in God's works, even in the most insignificant ones.
In his "Ordo temporum" (ix, 13) the same writer insists on the
unity of design, which makes one work out of all the books of
Scripture, the source of all times, and has measured the past
and the future alike. One of Bengel's disciples, P. M. Hahn,
compares (Theologische Schriften, ii, 9) the development of
revelation to the growth of a flower. The formative power hidden
in the seed manifests itself more and more by the addition of
each pair of leaves. This view was followed also by Ph. Hiller
in his work ("Neues System aller Vorbilder Christi im Alten
Testament" (1758), and by Crusius in his treatise "Hypomnemata
theol. propheticae" (1764-78). The last-named writer is of the
opinion that the figurative development of God's kingdom changes
into an historical growth at the time of David; he considers the
Kingdom of David as the embryo of the Kingdom of Christ.
IV. MODERATE USE OF TYPES
Owing to their lack of a clear distinction between type and
allegory, Martin Luther and Melanchthon did not esteem the
typical sense of Scripture at its true value. Andreas Rivetus
attempted to draw a line of distinction between type and
allegory (Praef. ad ps., 45), and Gerhard (Loci, II, 67) closely
adhered to his definition. But practically types were used for
parenetic rather than theological purposes by Baldwin (Passio
Christi typica; Adventus Christi typicus), Bacmeister
(Explicatio typorum V. T. Christum explicantium), and other
writers of this school. They would have had more confidence in
the typical sense of Scripture had they followed the view of
Bishops von Mildert and Marsh. For these writers did not leave
the typical sense to the imagination of the individual
expositor, but rigidly required competent evidence of the Divine
intention that a person or an event was to prefigure another
person or event. Even in the Bible they distinguish between
examples that are used for the sake of illustration only and
those when there is a manifest typical relationship and
connection. It is true that Calovius (Sytem. theol., I, 663) and
Aug. Pfeifer (Thes. herm., iii, can. 10) insist on admitting
only one sense, the literal, in Scripture; but as the literal
sense clearly indicates several types, writers like Buddeus,
Rambach, and Pfaff point out that such an insistence on the
literal sense differs only in words from the admission of a
limited typical sense. Rambach goes further than this; in order
to increase the parenetic force of Scripture, he attributes to
each word as wide a meaning and as much importance as the nature
of the subject matter allows (Instit. herm., 319). The
"Mysterium Christi et christianismi in fasciis typicis
antiquitatum V.T." by Joachim Lange, "Juedische Heiligthuemer"
by Lundius, and "Der Messias im A.T." by Schoettegen are other
works in which the element of edification is chiefly kept in
view.
V. SOCINIAN INFLUENCE
While in Cocceian and Lutheran circles typology flourished
either unrestrictedly or within certain bounds, it began to be
considered as a mere accommodation or as a subjective work of
parallelizing a number of Scripture passages by the Socinians
and by all those who failed to see the unity of God's work in
our history of Revelation. Clericus, writing on Galatians 4:22,
refers typology to a Jewish manner of interpreting Scripture.
The derivation of the Mosaic worship from Egyptian and Oriental
cults, as explained by Spencer, rendered void the typical sense
advocated in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hence, Henke considers
typology as an exploded system; Semler (Versuch einer freieren
theologischen Lehrart, 1777, p. 104), does not wish that types
should be considered any longer as belonging to the true
religion; Doederlein (Institutiones, 1779, n. 229) requires in a
type not a mere resemblance, but also that it should have been
expressly represented in the Old Testament as a figure of the
future; moreover, he believes that at the time of Moses no one
would have understood such figures. But how explain the fact
that the Apostles and Christ Himself employed the typical sense
of the Old Testament? They adapted themselves, we are told, in
their use of the Old Testament to the condition of the Jewish
people, and to the hermeneutical principles prevalent in the
Jewish schools. It followed, therefore, that the use of the
typical sense in the New Testament is nothing but Rabbinic
trifling. This point of view is followed in Doepke's
"Hermeneutik der neutestamentlichen Schriftsteller" (Part I,
1829), and also in the exegetical works of Ammon, Fritzsche,
Meyer, Rueckert, and others.
VI. REACTION AGAINST THE SOCINIAN VIEW
On the other hand, there was no lack of defenders of the typical
sense of Scripture. Michaelis (Entwurf der typischen
Gottesgelaehrtheir, 1752) points out that, even if we follow
Spencer's view of the origin of the Mosaic worship, borrowed
rites too may have a symbolic meaning; but the writer's
blindness to the distinction between type and symbol is the
vulnerable side of his treatise. Blasche shows himself a stout
adherent of typology in his "Commentary on the Epistle to the
Hebrews" (1782). Herder in his thirty-ninth letter on the study
of theology (1780) believes that, though each stone of a
building does not see either itself or the whole building, it
would be narrow-mindedness on our part to pretend that we do not
see more than any given part can see; it is only in the light of
historic development that we can appreciate the analogy of the
whole to each of its parts. Rau (Freimuethige Untersuchung ueber
die Typologie, 1784) reverts to a study of Spencer's derivation
of the Mosaic worship; and grants that the Jewish rites may be
symbols of the New Testament, but denies that they are types in
the stricter sense of the word.
VII. REVIVAL OF SYMBOLISM AND PIETISM
At the beginning of the nineteenth century there was a revival
of taste for symbolism, and of an appreciation of Bengel's
typicism. Starting from symbolism, de Wette ("Beitrag zur
Characteristic des Hebraismus" in "Studien von Daub und
Creuzer", 1807, III, 244) concludes that the whole of the Old
Testament is one great prophecy, one great type of what was to
come, and what has come to pass. F. von Meyer and Stier wrote in
the same strain, but they are men of less note. Influenced by
Bengel's view, Menken explained in a typical sense Daniel 2
(1802-1809), the brazen serpent (1812), Hebrews 8-10 (1821);
from the same point of view, Beck wrote his "Bemerkungen ueber
messianische Weissagungen" (Tuebinger Zeitschrift fuer
Theologie, 1831, part 3), and also explained Romans 9
(Christliche Lehrwissenschaft, I, 1833, p. 360). The same
principle underlies the view of Biblical history as presented by
Hofmann, Franz Delitzsch, Kurtz, and Auberlen. Ed. Boehmer in
his treatise "Zur biblishcen Typik" (1855) adopts a similar
point of view: One idea prevails through the whole of creation;
in nature the lower grades are types of the higher; the material
order is a type of the spiritual; and man is the antitype of
universal nature. The same law prevails in history; for the
earlier age is always the type of the subsequent. Thus the
Kingdom of God, which is the climax of Creation, has its types
in nature and its types in history.
VIII. RATIONALISTIC CONTENTION AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE
Needless to say rationalistic writers repudiate the typical
sense of Sacred Scripture. The Catholic doctrine as to the
nature of the typical sense, its existence, its extent, its
theological value, has been stated in EXEGESIS. -- (2).
A.J. MAAS
Tyrannicide
Tyrannicide
Tyrannicide literally is the killing of a tyrant, and usually is
taken to mean the killing of a tyrant by a private person for
the common good. There are two classes of tyrants whose
circumstances are widely apart -- tyrants by usurpation and
tyrants by oppression. A tyrant by usurpation (tyrannus in
titula) is one who unjustly displaces or attempts to displace
the legitimate supreme ruler, and he can be considered in the
act of usurpation or in subsequent peaceful possession of the
supreme power. A tyrant by oppression (tyrannus in regimine) is
a supreme ruler who uses his power arbitrarily and oppressively.
I. TYRANT BY USURPATION
While actually attacking the powers that be, a tyrant by
usurpation is a traitor acting against the common weal, and,
like any other criminal, may be put to death by legitimate
authority. If possible, the legitimate authority must use the
ordinary forms of law in condemning the tyrant to death, but if
this is not possible, it can proceed informally and grant
individuals a mandate to inflict the capital punishment. St.
Thomas (In II Sent., d. XLIV, Q. ii, a. 2), Suarez (Def. fidei,
VI, iv, 7), and the majority of authorized theologians say that
private individuals have a tacit mandate from legitimate
authority to kill the usurper when no other means of ridding the
community of the tyrant are available. Some, however, e.g.
Crolly (De justitia, III, 207), hold that an express mandate is
needed before a private person can take on himself the office of
executioner of the usurping tyrant. All authorities hold that a
private individual as such, without an express or tacit mandate
from authority, may not lawfully kill an usurper unless he is
actually his unjust aggressor. Moreover, it sometimes happens
that an usurper is accorded the rights of a belligerent, and
then a private individual, who is a non-combatant, is excluded
by international law from the category of those to whom
authority is given to kill the tyrant (Crolly, loc. cit.).
If an usurper has already established his rule and peacefully
reigns, until the prescriptive period has run its course the
legitimate ruler can lawfully expel him by force if he is able
to do so, and can punish him with death for his offence. If,
however, it is out of the legitimate ruler's power to
re-establish his own authority, there is nothing for it but to
acquiesce in the actual state of affairs and to refrain from
merging the community in the miseries of useless warfare. In
these circumstances, subjects are bound to obey the just laws of
the realm, and can lawfully take an oath of obedience to the de
facto ruler, if the oath is not of such a nature as to
acknowledge the legitimacy of the usurper's authority (cf. Brief
of Pius VIII, 29 Sept., 1830). This teaching is altogether
different from the view of those who put forward the doctrine of
accomplished facts, as it has come to be called, and who
maintain that the actual peaceful possessor of the ruling
authority is also legitimate ruler. This is nothing more or less
than the glorification of successful robbery.
II. TYRANT BY OPPRESSION
Looking on a tyrant by oppression as a public enemy, many
authorities claimed for his subjects the right of putting him to
death in defence of the common good. Amongst these were John of
Salisbury in the twelfth century (Polycraticus III, 15; IV, 1;
VIII, 17), and John Parvus (Jehan Petit) in the fifteenth
century. The Council of Constance (1415) condemned as contrary
to faith and morals the following proposition:
"Any vassal or subject can lawfully and meritoriously kill, and
ought to kill, any tyrant. He may even, for this purpose, avail
himself of ambushes, and wily expressions of affection or of
adulation, notwithstanding any oath or pact imposed upon him by the
tyrant, and without waiting for the sentence or order of any judge."
(Session XV)
Subsequently a few Catholics defended, with many limitations and
safeguards, the right of subjects to kill a tyrannical ruler.
Foremost amongst these was the Spanish Jesuit Mariana. In his
book, "De rege et regis institutione" (Toledo, 1599), he held
that people ought to bear with a tyrant as long as possible, and
to take action only when his oppression surpassed all bounds.
They ought to come together and give him a warning; this being
of no avail they ought to declare him a public enemy and put him
to death. If no public judgment could be given, and if the
people were unanimous, any subject might, if possible, kill him
by open, but not by secret means. The book was dedicated to
Philip III of Spain and was written at the request of his tutor
Garcias de Loaysa, who afterwards became Bishop of Toledo. It
was published at Toledo in the printing-office of Pedro Rodrigo,
printer to the king, with the approbation of Pedro de On,
Provincial of the Mercedarians of Madrid, and with the
permission of Stephen Hojeda, visitor of the Society of Jesus in
the Province of Toledo (see JUAN MARIANA). Most unfairly the
Jesuit Order has been blamed for the teaching of Mariana. As a
matter of fact, Mariana stated that his teaching on tyrannicide
was his personal opinion, and immediately on the publication of
the book the Jesuit General Aquaviva ordered that it be
corrected. He also on 6 July, 1610, forbade any member of the
order to teach publicly or privately that it is lawful to
attempt the life of a tyrant.
Though Catholic doctrine condemns tyrannicide as opposed to the
natural law, formerly great theologians of the Church like St.
Thomas (II-II, Q. xlii, a.2), Suarez (Def. fidei, VI, iv, 15),
and Banez, O.P. (De justitia et jure, Q. lxiv, a. 3), permitted
rebellion against oppressive rulers when the tyranny had become
extreme and when no other means of safety were available. This
merely carried to its logical conclusion the doctrine of the
Middle Ages that the supreme ruling authority comes from God
through the people for the public good. As the people
immediately give sovereignty to the ruler, so the people can
deprive him of his sovereignty when he has used his power
oppressively. Many authorities, e.g. Suarez (Def. fiedei, VI,
iv, 18), held that the State, but not private persons, could, if
necessary, condemn the tyrant to death. In recent times Catholic
authors, for the most part, deny that subjects have the right to
rebel against and depose an unjust ruler, except in the case
when the ruler was appointed under the condition that he would
lose his power if he abused it. In proof of this teaching they
appeal to the Syllabus of Pius IX, in which this proposition is
condemned: "It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate
princes, and even to rebel" (prop. 63). While denying the right
of rebellion in the strict sense whose direct object is the
deposition of the tyrannical ruler, many Catholic writers, such
as Crolly, Cathrein, de Bie, Zigliara, admit the right of
subjects not only to adopt an attitude of passive resistance
against unjust laws, but also in extreme cases to assume a state
of active defensive resistance against the actual aggression of
a legitimate, but oppressive ruler.
Many of the Reformers were more or less in favour of
tyrannicide. Luther held that the whole community could condemn
the tyrant to death (Saemmtliche Werke", LXII,
Frankfort-on-the-Main and Erlangen, 1854, 201, 206). Melanchthon
said that the killing of a tyrant is the most agreeable offering
that man can make to God (Corp. Ref., III, Halle, 1836, 1076).
The Calvinist writer styled Junius Brutus held that individual
subjects have no right to kill a legitimate tyrant, but that
resistance must be authorized by a representative council of the
people (Vindiciae contra Tyrannos, p. 45). John Knox affirmed
that it was the duty of the nobility, judges, rulers, and people
of England to condemn Queen Mary to death (Appellation).
J.M. HARTY
Tyre
Tyre
(TYRUS.)
Melchite archdiocese and Maronite diocese. The city is called in
Hebrew, Zor, and in Arabic, Sour, from two words meaning rock.
It is very ancient. If we are to believe priests of Melkart
quoted by Herodotus (II, 44) it was founded in the twenty-eighth
century B.C. Isaias himself (xxiii, 7) says that its origin was
ancient. According to the authors cited by Josephus (Ant. jud.,
VIII, iii, 1) and according to Justin (Hist., xviii, 3) its
foundation dates from the thirteenth century B.C., but this is
manifestly erroneous, for Tyre is mentioned under the name of
Sour-ri in the tablets of El-Amarna, between 1385 and 1368 B.C.
(Revue Biblique, 1908, 511). King Abimelech was then reigning
there independently, though his capital was much coveted by the
Egyptians, who forced the Tyrians to ally themselves with their
neighbours, especially the Philistines (see Ecclus., xlvi, 21).
Ancient writers, particularly Isaias (xxiii, 12), call Tyre
"daughter of Sidon", that is, they make it a colony of the
latter city. Despite objections which have been made to this,
the statement is correct, and on its coins Sidon claims to be
the mother of Hippo Regius, in Africa, of Tyre etc. It is true
that in a short time the colony overshadowed the mother, but the
inhabitants continued to call themselves Sidonians. On the other
hand, it is impossible to state which of the two cities,
Palaetyrus, on the sea-coast, or Tyrus, built on a rocky island
1968 feet above the sea, existed first. It is generally held,
however, that the continental preceded the insular city. The
reference in Josue (xix, 29) is not exactly identified, but in
the El-Amarna Letters the island is referred to, unless the
Egyptians who occupied all the seaboard cities had not subjected
it also to their dominion.
Tyre seems always to have had kings, like the other Chanaanite
cities. It was its sovereigns who made it the "queen of the
sea", as it loved to call itself, and its merchants nobles of
the earth, as Isaias says (xxiii, 3-8). The city was very proud
of its wealth and ships, which plied along the whole of the
Mediterranean coast, in Africa as well as in Europe, and the
pride of Tyre became almost as proverbial among the prophets of
Israel as that of Moab. King Hiram was one of its greatest
sovereigns. He sent to David the stone- cutters and carpenters
to build his palace (II Kings, v, 11), and to Solomon Lebanon
cedar and cypress wood for the construction of the Temple (III
Kings, ix, 11; II Par., ii, 3 sq.). The architect and his master
workmen were Tyrians. In return Solomon gave Hiram the district
of Cabul (Chabul) in Galilee, which included twenty small
cities, but the gift seems not to have been to the taste of the
King of Tyre (III Kings, ix, 11-14). Nevertheless, the two kings
were allies and their combined fleets left the ports of the Red
Sea for Ophir and Tharsis to obtain gold (III Kings, ix, 26-28;
x, 11 sq.; II Par., ix, 10, 21). Hiram accomplished great works
in his capital. He united the two parts of the island hitherto
separated by a canal which to a certain extent made them two
cities, and besides he built a great aqueduct which brought the
waters of Ras- el-Ain to the land.
Shortly afterwards court intrigues disturbed the city and gave
rise to a bloody revolution. Phalia, an intruder, usurped the
power; he was dethroned in turn by his brother Ithobael or
Ethbael, high priest of Astarte, a goddess who, with the god
Melkart, was much venerated in Tyre. It was Ethbael's daughter,
Jezabel, who married Achab, King of Israel. Jezabel was
undoubtedly a Tyrian princess; Menander in Josephus ("Ant.
jud.", VIII, xiii, 2; "Contra Appionem", I, 18; also III Kings,
xvi, 31) calls her father "Kind of the Sidonians", another
allusion to the Sidonian origin of Tyre. In 814 B.C. a group of
Tyrians went to the coast of Africa and founded Carthage, the
most famous colony of Tyre. The very amicable relations of
Tyrians and Jews did not last always; they waned especially when
Tyre sold as slaves the Israelitish prisoners of war (Joel, iii,
4-8; Amos, I, 9). On the other hand, the luxury and corrupt
morals which prevailed in the Phoenician city could not but have
a baneful influence on the Jews of the tribe of Aser and other
Israelites; so that the Prophets, such as Isaias (xxiii),
Ezechiel (xxvi-xxix), Joel (iii, 4-8), and Amos (I, 9), never
ceased to thunder against it and predict its ruin. Salmanasar,
King of Assur, and Sargon besieged it in vain for five years
after the fall of Samaria; although they cut the aqueduct of
Hiram and compelled the people of Sidon and Palaetyrus to place
their fleets at their service, that of the Tyrians completely
vanquished them (Josephus, "Ant. Jud.", IX, xiv, 2). Sennacherib
likewise attempted the siege in vain. Although paying him a
light tribute, Tyre remained a powerful state with its own kings
(Jer., xxv, 22; Ezech., xxvii and xxviii), and was enabled to
develop its mercantile proclivities and attain the great
prosperity spoken of by the prophets and all ancient writers. On
his return from his expedition against Egypt, Asarhaddon, like
his predecessors, blockaded Tyre, but the Tyrians, isolated on
their rock, with their powerful fleet and valiant mercenaries,
laughed at all his efforts. After having received tribute from
King Bael, Asarhaddon was compelled to retire. The same was true
of Nabuchodonosor after a severe blockade lasting thirteen
years. According to custom the Tyrians offered him a light
tribute, and the honour of the proud sovereign was declared
satisfied. Nevertheless, this long isolation greatly injured the
Tyrians, for during this interval a portion of the commerce
passed to Sidon and other Phoenician and Carthaginian peoples.
Furthermore, the Tyrian colonies, which for thirteen years had
broken all links of subjection to the mother country, were in no
wise eager to resume the yoke. Finally, as King Ithobael had
died during the siege, regents had assumed the authority
(Josephus, "Contra App." I, 21) and caused many trouble, as did
also the dikastai, or Suffetes, elected for seven years. The
monarchy was subsequently restored.
As the domination had passed from the Chaldeans to the Persians,
Tyre, a vassal or rather an ally of the former, readily assumed
the same relations with the latter and continued to prosper. The
Tyrians with their numerous ships assisted Xerxes against the
Greeks, who moreover were their commercial rivals, and Darius
against Alexander the Great. The King of Tyre himself fought in
the Persian fleet. Tyre refused submission to the Macedonian
hero, as well as authorization to sacrifice to the god Melkart,
whose temple was on the island; Alexander, taking offence,
determined to capture the island at any cost. The siege lasted
seven months. While the fleets of the submissive Cypriots and
Phoenicians blockaded the two ports at north and south,
Alexander, with materials from Palaetyrus, which he had just
destroyed, built an enormous causeway 1968 feet long by about
197 feet wide which connected the island with the continent. He
then laid siege to the ramparts of the city which on one side
reached a height of 150 feet. Tyre was captured in 332; 6000 of
its defenders were beheaded, 2000 crucified, more than 30,000
women, children, and servants sold as slaves. Although Alexander
razed the walls, the city was restored very quickly, since
seventeen years later it held out for fourteen months against
Antigonus, father of Demetrius Poliorcetes. From the power of
Egypt, Tyre in 287 passed under the dominion of the Seleucids in
198 B.C., obtaining self-government from them in 126 B. c. This
year begins the era special to Tyre. Augustus was the first to
rob it of its liberty (Dion Cassius, LIV, 7), for by his command
its coins ceased to bear the inscription "autonomous". Various
monuments were erected during the Roman period. Herod the Great
built a temple and adorned the public places. A colony under
Septimius Severus, Tyre subsequently became the capital of
Phoenicia; at the time of St. Jerome it was regarded as the
richest and greatest commercial city of the province (Comment.
in Ezech., xxvi, 6; xxvii, 1). Its factory of purple cloth was
foremost in the empire. It was a curious fact that under one of
the predecessors of Diocletian, Dorotheus, a learned priest of
Antioch, the master of Eusebius of Caesarea, was appointed
director without having to renounce his religion (Eusebius, "H.
E.", VII, 32).
In A.D. 613 the Jews of Tyre formed a vast conspiracy against
the Greek Empire, and subsequently ransomed from the troops of
Chosroes numerous captive Christians in order to sacrifice them.
In 638 the city fell into the hands of the Arabs. Baldwin I,
King of Jerusalem, besieged it in vain from 29 Nov., 1111, till
April, 1112. Baldwin II captured it, 27 June, 1124, after five
months' siege and made it the seat of a countship. When the
crusaders lost the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1187 by the defeat of
Tiberias, Tyre remained in the hands of the Franks and became
one of their chief fortresses. There in 1210 John of Brienne was
crowned king, and in 1225 his daughter Isabella was crowned
queen. Tyre was captured in May, 1291, after the fall of
Saint-Jean- d'Acre, by the Mussulmans, who completely destroyed
it, and it was never wholly restored afterwards. Occupied by the
Turks in 1516 it has always belonged to them, save for a brief
appearance of the French in 1799. It is now a caza of the
vilayet of Beirut. The city has 6500 inhabitants, of whom 4000
are Mussulmans of various races, 200 Latin Catholics, 350
Maronites, 1750 Melchite Catholics, 25 Protestants, and about
100 Jews. The Franciscans, established since 1866, have a
parochial church and a school for boys, the Sisters of St.
Joseph a school for girls; two other Catholic schools for boys
are kept by a Melchite priest and the religious of
Saint-Sauveur; the Russians have a school and the American
Protestants have one for boys and one for girls. Sour is no
longer an island, but a peninsula; Alexander s causeway had
grown larger as a result of sand formations, and is now an
isthmus, one mile and a quarter wide. There are still to be seen
the medieval city wall and a portion of the church of the
Crusaders, built by the Venetians and measuring 213 feet by 82
feet. It is generally regarded as containing the tomb of Conrad
de Montferrat, slain in the street by two members of the sect of
the Assassins (1192), and the tomb of the Emperor Frederick
Barbarossa (d. 1190). However, a German deputation sent by
Bismarck in 1874 to conduct excavations discovered nothing.
Among the glories of Tyre were: Ulpianus, the celebrated
jurisconsult, slain at Rome by the praetorians in 228; the
neo-Platonic philosopher, Porphyry, whose true name was Malchus
(b. 233; d. 304), the determined enemy of the Christians,
against whom he wrote a work in fifteen books; some hold that he
was born not at Tyre, but at Balanaia; Origen, who was not born
at Tyre, but who died there in 253 in consequence of the
tortures which he underwent under Decius, and was buried in the
church destroyed under Diocletian; St. Methodius, spoken of by
St. Jerome as a martyr and Bishop of Tyre under Decius, was in
reality Bishop of Olympus in Lycia, and died about 311; as for
Dorotheus, a martyr and the author of a work on the Apostles and
the seventy disciples, he never existed, and the work is a
forgery compiled in the eighth century by a cleric of Byzantium.
Although the corruption of Tyre had become proverbial in the
time of Christ (Matt., xi, 21 sq.; Luke, x, 13 sq.), there were
Tyrians eager to hear the preaching of Jesus and who came as far
as the vicinity of Tiberias to listen to Him. (Mark, iii, 8;
Luke, vi, 17). This is perhaps why Jesus went to the
neighbourhood of Tyre to cure the sick and convert sinners
(Matt., xv, 21-29; Mark, vii, 24-31). A Christian community was
formed there at an early date, which St. Paul and St. Luke
visited and where they remained seven days (Acts, xxi, 3-7).
About 190 the Church in this city was directed by Bishop
Cassius, who with the bishops of Ptolemais, Caesarea, and Aelia
assisted at the council held in Palestine to deal with the
Paschal controversy (Eusebius, "H. E.", V, 25). About 250 we
know of the Bishop Marinus mentioned in a letter of Dionysius of
Alexandria (Euseb., op. cit., VII, 5). About 250 we know of the
Bishop Marinus mentioned in a letter of Dionysius of Alexandria
(Euseb., op. cit., VII, 5). The community suffered greatly
during the last persecution. After the edict of Diocletian the
church was burnt and was only rebuilt after religious peace had
been obtained. It was Eusebius of Caesarea who pronounced the
discourse at the dedication of the new basilica and who
describes the oldest basilica known to us (op. cit., X, 4).
Tyrannius, Bishop of Tyre, was captured and drowned at Antioch
(op. cit., VIII, 13). Eusebius himself assisted in the
amphitheatre of this city at the execution of five Christians of
Egyptian origin (op. cit., VIII, 7). In 306 St. Ulpianus was
shut up with a dog and an asp in a calfskin and thrown into the
sea (Euseb., "De Martyr. Paleaestinae" V, 2). At Caesarea
Maritima one of the first victims was St. Theodosia, a young
Tyrian girl of eighteen, who was horribly tortured and then
thrown into the sea on Easter Sunday, 2 April, 307 (Euseb., "H.
E.", VII, I). In 311 a municipal decree forbidding Christians to
stay in the city was posted up in Tyre, together with a message
of congratulations from the Emperor Maximin (Eusebius, "H. E.",
IX, vii). This did not prevent the Church of Tyre from
subsisting and developing after peace was granted to the
disciples of Christ.
Shortly afterwards Tyre furnished Ethiopia with its first and
greatest missionary, St. Frumentius, who went to Africa with a
philosopher who was his master and was consecrated by St.
Athanasius the first bishop of that country. Three councils were
held at Tyre. The first, convened by Constantine (335), which
had about 310 members, judged the cause of St. Athanasius, who
was in Tyre with 48 Egyptian bishops, and after a series of
injustices it deposed him. Eusebius of Caesarea presided over
the assembly (Hefele-Leclercq, "Hist. des conciles", I, 656-66).
Another council was held in February, 449, to examine the cause
of Ibas, Bishop of Edessa, who was accused by the clerics of his
church and absolved by this council. This sentence had serious
consequences at Chalcedon and especially at the Council of the
Three Chapters in 553 (Hefele-Leclercq, op. cit., II, 493-98).
Finally, in 514 or 515 was held a council under the presidency
of Severus, Patriarch of Antioch, and of Philoxens, metropolitan
of Hierapolis, and which assembled the bishops of the provinces
of Antioch, Apamaea, Augusta Euphratensis, Osrhoene,
Mesopotamia, Arabia, and Phoenicia Libanensis. it rejected the
Council of Chalcedon, and the Henoticon of the Emperor Zeno was
explained in a sense clearly opposed to the latter council
(Lebon, "Le monophysisme severien", Louvain, 1909, 62-4).
Le Quien (Oriens christ., II, 801-12) mentions 20 bishops of
this see, some of whom have no right to figure in the list.
Besides those already mentioned were: Paulinus, friend of
Eusebius of Caesarea, mentioned by Arius in a letter as being
one of his partisans (Theodoret, "H.E.", I, v) and who
subsequently became Patriarch of Antioch; Irenaeus, previously a
count, a partisan of Nestorius exiled in 449 to Petra, and who
compiled a collection of very valuable documents which have
reached us under the title of "Tragaedia Irenaei"; Photius, very
active in the religious quarrels of his time, and who assisted
at the Councils of Tyre and Chalcedon, as well as at the Robber
Council of Ephesus; John Codonatus, a Monophysite and friend of
Peter Fullo, Patriarch of Antioch; Thomas, who at the Eighth
Ecumenical Council represented the Patriarch of Antioch.
Included at first in the Province of Syria, the Diocese of Tyre
formed part of Phoenicia, at the creation of that province by
Septimius Severus shortly before 198, when it became the
religious as well as the civil metropolis; its bishop, Marinus,
had the title of metropolitan as early as 250 (Euseb., "H. E.",
VII, v). When between 381 and 425 Phoenicia was subdivided into
two provinces, Phoenicia Maritima and Phoenicia Libanensis, Tyre
remained the metropolis of the former. At the Council of
Chalcedon in 451 Photius had to defend his rights as
metropolitan against the Bishop of Berytus, formerly his
suffragan, who divided Phoenicia Prima into two parts and
assumed authority over all the bishoprics of the north. The
council recognized the rights of Photius and gave him
jurisdiction over all the dioceses with the exception of
Berytus, which remained an autocephalous metropolis. Some years
later Tyre became the chief see of the Patriarchate of Antioch,
I. e. it attained first rank among the metropolitan sees. The
reason for this was that, about 480, John Codnatus, Patriarch of
Antioch, having resigned in favour of Calandion, the latter
appointed him Metropolitan of Tyre, with the right for himself
and his successors of thenceforth sitting immediately after the
patriarch (Theophanes, "Chronographia"). In the "Notitia
episcopatuum" of Antioch in the sixth century Tyre had 13
suffragan sees (Echos d'Orient, X, 145). In the tenth century
the western boundaries of the archdiocese went from the great
spring of Zip (Az-Zib) to Nahr-Laitani, the ancient Leontes
(Echos d'Orient, X, 97). The Greek archdiocese was retained even
during the Latin occupation, but the titular resided at
Constantinople.
Odo, the first Latin archbishop, was appointed in 1122 and died
two years later when the Franks were besieging the city; his
successor, William, was of English origin. In disregard of the
ancient canon law, the new metropolitan was subjected to the
Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, which aroused protest on the part
of the See of Antioch. The dispute which followed was referred
to the tribunal of Pope Innocent II, who decided in favour of
the Patriarch of Jerusalem in virtue of a Decree of his
predecessor, Paschal II, who granted to King Baldwin the right
to subject to Jerusalem all the episcopal sees he should succeed
in conquering from the Mussulmans. Hence two letters of Innocent
II obliged the Archbishop of Tyre to submit to the jurisdiction
of Jerusalem together with his six suffragans, the Bishops of
Tripoli, Tortosa (or Antaradus), Byblos, Berytus, Sidon, and
Ptolemais. Later, when the cities of Tripoli, Tortosa, and
Byblos came into the power of the Prince of Antioch, their
bishops also became dependent on the Latin Patriarch of Antioch.
For long lists of Latin archbishops see Le Quien (Oriens christ,
III, 1309-20) and Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, I,
534; II, 284; III, 342). The most famous was William II, the
historian of the crusades. The Latins evacuated Tyre in 1291 and
the archbishop, by the pope's command, having left the city, 8
Oct., 1294, there were thenceforth only titular archbishops.
The Melchite Archdiocese of Tyre is bounded on the north by Nahr
el-Laitani, on the east by a line of wooded hills separating the
District of Beharre from that of Merdjaioun, on the south by the
Diocese of St.-Jean d'Acre, and on the west by the sea. It has
14 churches and chapels, 13 stations with or without residential
priests, 16 priests, of whom 6 are seculars and 10 religious of
Saint-Sauveur, 16 primary schools for boys and girls, half of
which are in charge of Latin missionaries and European sisters.
The number of faithful is 5300. Besides their mission at Tyre,
the American Protestants have two schools in the Diocese at
Almat and Cana. The Maronite diocese, founded in 1906 to the
detriment of that of Saida, is bounded on the west by the sea,
on the north by the River Zaharani, on the east by the Jordan,
and on the south by the Sinaitic peninsula. It has 10,000
faithful, 20 priests, and 20 churches; the number of schools is
unknown. The schismatic Graeco-Arabic Archdiocese of Tyre and
Sidon has about 9000 faithful.
S. VAILHE
James Tyrie
James Tyrie
Theologian, b. at Drumkilbo, Perthshire, Scotland, 1543; d. at
Rome, 27 May, 1597. Educated first at St. Andrews, he joined
Edmund Hay (q. v.) at the time of de Gouda's mission in 1526. In
his company he then went to Rome, was there admitted into the
Society of Jesus, and was eventually sent to Clermont College,
Paris, in June, 1567, where Hay had become rector; and remained
there in various posts, e.g. professor, head of the Scottish
Jesuit Mission (1585), till 1590. During this period he was once
engaged in a controversy with Knox, against whom he wrote "The
Refutation of ane Answer made be Schir Johne Knox to ane letter
be James Tyrie" (Paris, 1573). Next year he discussed several
points of religion with Andrew Melville privately in Paris. In
1585 he was summoned to Rome as the representative of France on
the Committee of Six, who eventually drew up Father Acquaviva's
first edition of the "Ratio Studiorum", printed in 1586. He was
rector of Clermont College during the great siege of Paris (May
to September, 1590). His anxieties and difficulties must then
have been great, as he had over a hundred scholars as well as a
large community to feed, and at a time when men were perishing
with hunger in the streets. After the Duke of Parma had
revictualled the town (September), Tyrie was again sent to Rome,
as French deputy for the congregation, which finally supported
the government of Father Acquaviva.
On his return in December, Tyrie was sent to the University of
Pont-`a- Mousson, as professor of Scripture and head of the
Scots College, and two years later, on the successive deaths of
Fathers Edmund Hay and Paul Hoffaeus, he was again called to
Rome (22 May, 1592), where he became Assistant for France and
Germany, and played his part in the important Sixth General
Congregation of the Society of Jesus (1593). He also supported
at Rome the vain endeavours in Scotland of the three Catholic
Earls of Huntly, Erroll, and Angus to maintain themselves, with
King James's connivance, by force of arms against the Kirk
(1594). The earls asked and obtained a subsidy from Clement
VIII; and Father Tyrie's advice and opinion were constantly
taken by both the papal and the Scottish negotiators. He also
took steps to restore the Scottish hospital at Rome, which
eventually (1600) became the Scots College there. Rare as it was
to keep on good terms with adversaries in those days, Tyrie won
praise from such men as David Buchanan, both for his ability and
for his courtesy. Part of his cursus is preserved in manuscript
at the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris.
J.H. POLLEN
__________________________________________________________________
Casimir Ubaghs
Casimir Ubaghs
Born at Bergelez-Fauquemont, 26 November, 1800; died at Louvain,
15 February, 1875, was for a quarter of a century the chief
protagonist of the Ontologico-Traditionalist School of Louvain.
In 1830, while professor of philosophy at the lower seminary of
Rolduc, he was called to Louvain, which under his influence
became a centre of Ontologism. In 1846 he undertook the
editorship of the "Revue catholique", the official organ of
Ontologism, in conjunction with Arnold Tits, who had taught with
him at Rolduc and joined him at Louvain in 1840, and Lonay,
professor at Rolduc. La Foret, Claessens, the Abbe Bouquillon,
Pere Bernard Van Loo, and others followed the doctrines of
Ubaghs. But opponents soon appeared. The "Journal historique et
litteraire", founded by Kersten, kept up an incessant
controversy with the "Revue catholique". Kersten was joined by
Gilson, dean of Bouillon, Lupus, and others. From 1858 to 1861
the controversy raged. It was at its height when a decision of
the Roman Congregation (21 Sept., 1864) censured in Ubaghs's
works, after a long and prudent deliberation, a series of
propositions relating to Ontologism. Already in 1843 the
Congregation of the Index had taken note of five propositions
and ordered M. Ubaghs to correct them and expunge them from his
teaching, but he misunderstood the import of this first
decision. When his career was ended in 1864 he had the
mortification of witnessing the ruin of a teaching to which he
had devoted forty years of his life. From 1864 until his death
he lived in retirement.
The theories of Ubaghs are contained in a vast collection of
treatises on which he expended the best years of his life.
Editions followed one another as the range of his teaching
widened. The fundamental thesis of Traditionalism is clearly
affirmed by Ubaghs, the acquisition of metaphysical and moral
truths is inexplicable without a primitive Divine teaching and
its oral transmission. Social teaching is a natural law, a
condition so necessary that without a miracle man could not save
through it attain the explicit knowledge of truths of a
metaphysical and a moral order. Teaching and language are not
merely a psychological medium which favours the acquisition of
these truths; its action is determinant. Hence the primordial
act of man is an act of faith; the authority of others becomes
the basis of certitude. The question arises: Is our adhesion to
the fundamental truths of the speculative and moral order blind;
and, is the existence of God, which is one of them, impossible
of rational demonstration? Ubaghs did not go as far as this; his
Traditionalism was mitigated, a semi-Traditionalism; once
teaching has awakened ideas in us and transmitted the maxims
(ordo acquisitionis) reason is able and apt to comprehend them.
Though powerless to discover them it is regarded as being
capable of demonstrating them once they have been made known to
it. One of his favourite camparisons admirably states the
problem: "As the word 'view' chiefly expresses four things, the
faculty of seeing, the act of seeing, the object seen, e.g. a
landscape, and the drawing an artist makes of this object, so we
give the name idea, which is derived from the former, chiefly to
four different things: the faculty of knowing rationally, the
act of rational knowledge, the object of this knowledge, the
intellectual copy or formula which we make of this object in
conceiving it" (Psychologie, 5th ed., 1857, 41-42). Now, the
objective idea, or object-idea (third acceptation), in other
words, the intelligible which we contemplate, and contact with
which produces within us the intellectual formula (notion), is
"something Divine" or rather it is God himself. This is the core
of Ontologism. The intelligence contemplates God directly and
beholds in Him the truths or "objective ideas" of which our
knowledge is a weak reflection. Assuredly, if Ubaghs is right,
skepticism is definitively overcome. Likewise if teaching plays
in the physical life the part he assigns to it, the same is true
of every doctrine which asserts the original independence of
reason and which Ubaghs calls Rationalism. But this so-called
triumph was purchased at the cost of many errors. It is, to say
the least, strange that on the one hand Ontologistic
Traditionalism is based on a distrust of reason and on the other
hand it endows reason with unjustifiable prerogatives. Surely it
is an incredible audacity to set man face to face with the
Divine essence and to attribute to his weak mind the immediate
perception of the eternal and immutable verities.
Ubaghs's principal works are:
+ "Logicae seu philosophiae rationalis elementa" (6 editions,
1834-60);
+ "Ontologiae sive metaph. generalis specimen" (5 editions,
1835-63);
+ "Theodicae seu theologiae naturalis" (4 editions);
+ "Anthropoligicae philosoph. elementa" (1848);
+ "Precis de logique elementaire" (5 editions);
+ "Precis d'anthropol. psychologique" (5 editions);
+ "Du realisme en theologie et en philosophie" (1856);
+ "Essai d'ideologie ontologique" (1860);
+ numerous articles in the Louvain "Revue catholique".
M. DE WULF
St. Ubaldus
St. Ubaldus
Confessor, Bishop of Gubbio, born of noble parents at Gubbio,
Umbria, Italy, towards the beginning of the twelfth centry; died
there, Whitsuntide, 1168. Whilst still very young, having lost
his father, he was educated by the prior of the cathedral church
of his native city, where he also became a canon regular.
Wishing to serve God with more regularity he passed to the
Monastery of St. Secondo in the same city, where he remained for
some years. Recalled by his bishop, he returned to the cathedral
monestary, where he was made prior. Having heard that Vienna
Blessed Peter de Honestis some years before had established a
very fervent community of canons regular, to whom he had given
special statutes which had been approved by Paschall II, Ubaldus
went there, remaining with his brother canons for three months,
to learn the details and the practice of their rules, wishing to
introduce them among his own canons of Gubbio. This he did at
his return. Serving God in great regularity, poverty (for all
his rich patrimony he had given to the poor and to the
restoration of monasteries), humility, mortification, meekness,
and fervour, the fame of his holiness spread in the country, and
several bishoprics were offered to him, but he refused them all.
However, the episcopal See of Gubbio becoming vacant, he was
sent, with some clerics, by the population to ask for a new
bishop from Honorius II who, having consecrated him, sent him
back to Gubbio. To his people he became a perfect pattern of all
Christian virtues, and a powerful protector in all their
spiritual and temporal needs. He died full of merits, after a
long and painful illness of two years. Numerous miracles were
wrought by him in life and after death. At the solicitation of
Bishop Bentivoglio Pope Celestine III canonized him in 1192. His
power, as we read in the Office for his feast, is chiefly
manifested over the evil spirits, and the faithful are
instructed to have recourse to him "contra omnes diabolicas
nequitias".
The life of the saint was written by Blessed Theobaldus, his
immediate successor in the episcopal see, and from this source
is derived all the information given by his numerous
biographers. The body of the holy man, which had at first been
buried in the cathedral church by the Bishops of Perugia and
Cagli, at the time of his canonization was found flexible and
incorrupt, and was then placed in a small oratory on the top of
the hill overlooking the city, where in 1508, at the wish of the
Duke of Urbino, the canons regular built a beautiful church,
frequented to this day by numerous pilgrims, who come to visit
the relics of their heavenly protector from near and far. The
devotion to the saint is very popular throughout Umbria, but
especially at Gubbio, where in every family at least one member
is called Ubaldus. The feast of their patron saint is celebrated
by the inhabitants of the country round with great solemnity,
there being religious and civil processions which call to mind
the famous festivities of the Middle Ages in Italy.
A. ALLARIA
Prefecture Apostolic of Belgian Ubanghi
Prefecture Apostolic of Belgian Ubanghi
In Belgian Congo, separated on 7 April, 1911, from the Vicariate
of the Belgian Congo and entrusted to the Capuchins. Its
boundaries are: west and north, the river Ubanghi from 1DEG 30'
N. lat. to the meeting of the Mbomu and the Uelle at Yakoma;
east, a line drawn from that point towards the junction of the
Itimbri (Rubi) and the Congo, as far as the southern limits of
the village of Abumombasi; south, the parallel passing through
Abumombasi, then the watersheds of the Ubanghi and the Congo,
and of the Ubanghi and the Ngiri to 1DEG 30' N. Lat., and thence
to the Ubanghi. R.P. Fulgence de Gerard-Montes was appointed
first prefect Apostolic 11 July 1911.
A.A. MACERLEAN
Ubanghi
Ubanghi
(UPPER FRENCH CONGO.)
Vicariate Apostolic; formerly part of the Vicariate of French
Congo, erected on 14 Oct., 1890. It has an area of about 386,000
sq. miles, and is bounded south and east by the Congo and the
Ubanghi; north by the Prefecture Apostolic of Ubanghi-Chari;
west by the Vicariates of Loanga, Gabon, and Camerun; the
mission of Linzolo lying south-west of Brazzaville was
transferred from Loanga to Ubanghi on 14 Feb., 1911. The
principal tribes in the vicariate are the Batekes, Bavanzis, and
Bondjos, the last two being cannibals. The French
representatives, especially M. de Chavannes and M. Dolisie, have
greatly aided in the establishment and development of the
mission. The first attempt to gain a foothold in the territory
of the vicariate was made by Father (now Bishop) Augouard in
1883 at Brazzaville, but it failed owing to the unhappy
experiences of the natives at the hands of Stanley; in July,
1887, however, Mgr. Carrie succeeded, owing to the help of M. de
Chavannes. The Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny arrived at
Brazzaville on 21 August, 1892, and have a convent, chapel, and
school there on a site presented by the French Government.
Brazzaville, the centre of French interests in the Congo and in
which the bishop resides, is situated on a plateau 120 ft. high
at the place where the Congo leaves Stanley Pool. Its cathedral,
37 metres long, 12 broad, and 9 high, surmounted by a steeple
and cross rising 20 metres, was dedicated on 3 May, 1894. In
1895 the first two Christian marriages in Ubanghi were
solemnized before the vicar apostolic. The mission spread to the
surrounding villages and later to the Alima, 300 kilometres up
the Congo; still higher up are the stations at Liranga (at the
junction of the Congo and the Ubanghi), founded by Fathers Paris
and Allaire on 3 April, 1889; at Bangui (1125 miles from the
coast), established among the cannibal Bondjos and Buzerus and
pastoral Ndris, by Fathers Sallaz and Remy, in January, 1894;
and at Sainte-Famille among the Banziris, in 1895, by Father
Moreau, -- this is now the headquarters of the Prefecture of
Ubanghi Chari. Near these stations have been established "free
villages" where natives escaping from the clutches of the
cannibal or slave owners can reside in safety. Bishop Augouard
was awarded a prize of $3000 in April, 1912, by the French
Academy of Moral and Political Sciences in appreciation of his
work during thirty-four years in French Congo. Mission
statistics: The vicariate, of which Bishop Philippe-Prosper
Augouard, titular Bishop of Sinidos (b. 16 Sept., 1852; joined
the Congregation of the Holy Ghost, to whom the mission is
entrusted; and was consecrated, 23 November, 1890), is in
charge, has 12 priests; 25 lay brothers; 12 Sisters of St.
Joseph of Cluny; 8 churches; 4 stations; 23 chapels; 23 schools
with 1534 children; 7 orphanages with 902 orphans; 8 hospitals;
5 workshops; Catholic population, 3500; 2500 catechumens; and
5,000,000 pagans. The hot damp climate is very severe, and in
one year (1897-8) 14 of the 31 missionaries died.
A.A. MACERLEAN
Ubanghi-Chari
Ubanghi-Chari
Prefecture Apostolic in Equatorial Africa, lies west of the
Bahr-el-Ghazal territory and south of the Tchad district, and
extends from 4DEG30' to 10DEG N. lat., and from 12DEG to
26DEG30' E. longitude. This region was formerly part of the
Vicariate Apostolic of Ubanghi or Upper French Congo; its first
mission post was established at Sainte-Famille on the Upper
Ubanghi, about 1375 miles from the western coast by river, by R.
P. Moreau, C.S.Sp., in 1895, among the Banzus or Banziris, in an
almost unknown country. At the request of Mgr. Philippe-Prosper
Augouard, C.S.Sp., titular Bishop of Sinide and Vicar Apostolic
of Ubanghi, Ubanghi- Chari was withdrawn from his jurisdiction
in May, 1909, and formed into a new prefecture Apostolic under
the care of the Fathers of the Holy Ghost, R. P. Pierre Catel,
C.S.Sp., being appointed prefect Apostolic. He resides at
Sainte-Famille. The mission contains: 23 priests; 14 lay
brothers; 11 nuns; 18 catechists; 15 stations; 17 churches and
chapels; 22 schools, with 1756 pupils and 902 orphans; 3500
Catholics; and 2500 catechumens Boundaries: north and east, the
Vicariate of the Sudan; south, the Prefectures of Uelle and
Belgian Ubanghi, the Vicariate of Upper French Congo; west, the
Vicariate of Camerun and the Prefecture of Northern Nigeria.
A.A. MACERLEAN
Uberaba
Uberaba
(DE UBERABA.)
Suffragan diocese of Marianna, in Brazil, created by the
Consistorial Decree of 29 September, 1907, separating it from
the Diocese of Goyaz, and placing under its jurisdiction the
part of Minas Geraes known as Triangulo Mineiro and the
following parishes which formerly belonged to the Diocese of
Diamantina: Urcuia or Burity, Capim Branco or Rio Preto,
Paracatu, Alegres, Santa Rita de Patos, Capa Redondo, and Sao
Romao. The diocese is bounded: on the north by the Urucuia
River; east, the Sao Francisco River; south, the Marcella and
Canastra mountain ranges and the Rio Grande; west, the
Paranahyba and Jacare rivers, and the Geral mountain range. The
Catholic population numbered 200,000 souls in 1911. Rt. Rev.
Eduardo Duarte Silva, the first and present bishop, was born at
Florianopolis, 27 Jan., 1852; studied in the Pio-Latino College
of Rome; was ordained priest, 19 Dec., 1874; chaplain of the
Florianopolis hospital and canon of the imperial chapel; elected
Bishop of Goyaz, 23 Jan., 1891, and consecrated on 8 Feb., 1891;
preconized Bishop of Uberaba, 19 Dec., 1908. The following
religious orders are in the diocese: Dominicans, Recollects,
Lazarists, Dominican nuns, Franciscan Missionary nuns of Egypt.
There are 45 churches. The Catholic educational institutions
are: the Gymnasio Diocesano, a school of secondary instruction
with the privileges of a federal college, directed by the Marist
Brothers; and the Collegio de Nossa Senhora das Dores, for
girls, under the Dominican nuns. The principal Catholic
charitable associations are: the Sociedade de S. Vicente de
Paula; the Irmandade da Santa Casa de Misericordia; and the
Associac,ao das Damas de Caridade. The official organ of the
diocese is the "Correio Catholico" (Uberaba).
JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE
Ubertino of Casale
Ubertino of Casale
Leader of the Spirituals, born at Casale of Vercelli, 1259; died
about 1330.
He assumed the Franciscan habit in a convent of the province of
Genoa in 1273, and was sent to Paris to continue his studies,
where he remained nine years, after which he returned to Italy.
In 1285 he visited the sanctuaries of Rome, and thence proceeded
to Greccio, near Rieti, to see the Blessed John of Parma, who
was considered as the patriarch of the Spiritual Friars.
Afterwards he settled in Tuscany and in 1287, at Florence, was
the companion and disciple of Brother Pierre-Jean Olivi. He held
a lectorship at Santa Croce, Florence, but abandoned it after a
few years to dedicate himself to preaching, especially at
Florence. Being a man of genius, but of an eccentric and
restless character, he soon became the leader of the famous
Spirituals in Tuscany, professed strange ideas regarding
evangelical and Franciscan poverty, and attacked the government
of the order, although some of these ideas had been reproved by
Olivi in his letter of Sept., 1295, to Blessed Conrado da
Offida, a moderate Zelante of Franciscan poverty. The Spirituals
of Tuscany were so fanatical as publicly to blame Gregory IX and
Nicholas III, and even to condemn them as heretics, for having
interpreted the Rule of St. Francis as regards poverty according
to justice and moderation; they also condemned Innocent III, who
had strongly disapproved of the teaching of Joachim of Flora,
whom they regarded as an oracle of the Holy Ghost, and whose
theories were the cause of the discord in the Franciscan Order
in the first half of the fourteenth century.
On account of his excessive and satirical criticism, Ubertino
was summoned before Benedict XI and forbidden to preach at
Perugia, and was banished to the Convent of La Verna, where in
1305 he conceived and wrote, in only three months and seven days
(if he can be believed on this point), his chief work, "Arbor
vitae crucifixae Jesu Christi". This work is a collection of
allegorical, theological, and political theories regarding civil
society and the Church of those days, and expounds also his
ideal of the near future. In this work he criticises everything
and everyone, the popes and the Church, especially for pretended
abuses of riches in the ecclesiastical and civil states, and
finally the Franciscan Order for not practising the extremest
poverty. In the same work, (book I, chap. iv) is the first
mention of the legend of the resurrection of St. Francis, as he
affirms to have heard from Blessed Conrado da Offida, and the
latter from Blessed Brother Leo, that Christ had raised up St.
Francis with a glorious body to console his poor friars, who,
according to Ubertino, were of course the Spirituals only.
Notwithstanding the Utopian theories of Ubertino, he had many
protectors and admirers, and in 1307, after having written the
"Arbor vitae", he was chosen chaplain and familiar to Cardinal
Napoleone Orsini, nephew of Nicholas III, who had been created
by Celestine V protector of the Spirituals of the Marches of
Ancona, but which protectorate soon ceased by the election of
Boniface VIII in Dec., 1294. Orsini, who in 1306-08 had been
pontifical legate in central Italy, deputed Ubertino on 10
Sept., 1307, to absolve the inhabitants of Siena, who had
incurred ecclesiastical censure. When Orsini went to Germany in
1308, Ubertino did not accompany him, being then called to
France. In the years 1309-12, which witnessed the greatest
struggle in the Franciscan Order, Ubertino was called to Avignon
with other chiefs of the Spirituals to discuss before the pope
the questions at issue between the two parties in the order.
Four points were discussed:
1. the relations of the order with the sect of the so-called
Followers of the Free Spirit;
2. the condemnation and doctrine of Olivi;
3. the poverty and discipline in the Order of Friars Minor; and
4. the supposed persecutions of the Spirituals of the order.
During the discussions Ubertino behaved in a very boisterous and
insolent manner against the whole body of the order, accusing it
of many false and unjust things; however, he was forced to
acknowledge that regular discipline substantially existed in the
order; but as regards poverty he attacked openly the pontifical
declarations as contrary to the rule and as a cause of ruin to
the order. He pretended that the Friars Minor should be
compelled to observe ad litteram St. Francis's Testament and
Rule, and even all the evangelical counsels taught by Christ.
And because all this was not possible to obtain from the
majority of the order, he exacted that convents and provinces
should be erected for the reform party. But this was absolutely
denied, whilst on the other hand the question of practical
observance of poverty was settled by the famous Bull, "Exivi de
paradiso", 6 May, 1312, partly called forth by the polemical
writings of Ubertino.
Ubertino thereon retired to Avignon in 1313, and stayed with
Cardinal Giacomo Colonna till he had obtained from John XXII (1
Oct., 1317) permission to leave the order and to enter the
Benedictine Abbey of Gembloux, Diocese of Liege. Some have
doubted whether the Benedictines would have received in their
community a person of such a restless character, but we are
assured of it by Clareno and a notary of King James II of Aragon
in the year 1318. Notwithstanding this, Ubertino did not desist
from mixing himself up in the question that troubled the
Franciscan Order till he was excommunicated by John XXII. While
still a favourite of this pope and a familiar of Cardinal
Orsini, he was invited by the sovereign pontiff to give his
opinion regarding the other famous question discussed between
the Dominicans and Franciscans, that is, concerning the poverty
of Jesus Christ and that of the Apostles. This latter question,
far more than the one concerning the Spirituals, caused the
disastrous schism in the order headed by Michael of Cesena,
general of the order, and seconded by the rebellious Louis IV of
Bavaria. Ubertino was at Avignon in 1322; on the request of the
Pope he wrote his answer to the question then in controversy,
asserting that Christ and the Apostles have to be considered in
a two-fold condition: as private persons they had repudiated all
property, but as ministers of religion they made use of goods
and money for necessaries and alms. John XXII was satisfied with
the answer, but Ubertino returned again to the service of
Cardinal Orsini, and continued his writings to concern himself
in the question, which meanwhile had been settled, 1322-23.
However this may be, it is certain that in 1325 he was accused
of heresy, especially of having obstinately sustained some
errors of Olivi.
Ubertino, foreseeing the condemnation that hung over him, fled
from Avignon, and the pope in a letter dated 16 Sept., 1325,
commanded the general of the Franciscans to have him arrested as
a heretic; but Ubertino probably went to Germany under the
protection of Louis the Bavarian, whom he is said to have
accompanied on his way to Rome in 1328. From this time Ubertino
disappeared from history, so that nothing more is known of him.
Some suppose that he left the Benedictines in 1332 to join the
Carthusians, but this is not certain. The Fraticelli of the
fifteenth century, who venerated him as a saintly man, spread
the news that he had been killed. The end of this famous leader
of the Spirituals, remembered by even Dante in the twelfth canto
of the "Paradise", will probably remain an obscure point in
history.
Besides the "Arbor vitae", his principal work, printed once only
at Venice in 1485, and of which scarcely thirteen manuscripts
are known in the principal libraries of Europe, Ubertino also
wrote other works of a polemical kind:
+ the "Responsio" to the questions of Clement V (1310);
+ the "Rotulus" (1311);
+ the "Declaratio" against the Franciscan Order (1311);
+ the apology of Olivi "Sanctitati Apostolicae", and
+ the treatise "Super tribus sceleribus" on poverty, compiled
also in 1311.
HIERON. GOLUBOVICH
Ubiquitarians
Ubiquitarians
Also called Ubiquists, a Protestant sect started at the Lutheran
synod of Stuttgart, 19 December, 1559, by John Brenz, a Swabian
(1499-1570). Its profession, made under the name of Duke
Christopher of Wuertemberg, and entitled the "Wuertemberg
Confession," was sent to the Council of Trent, in 1552, but had
not been formally accepted as the Ubiquitarian creed until the
synod at Stuttgart. Luther had upset the peace of Germany by his
disputes. In the effort to reconcile and unite the contending
forces against the Turks, Charles V demanded of the Lutherans a
written statement of their doctrines. This -- the "Augsburg
Confession" -- was composed by Melanchthon, and read at a
meeting at Augsburg in 1530. Its tenth article concerned the
Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, a burning
question among the Protestants. In 1540, Melanchthon published
another version of the "Augsburg Confession", in which the
article on the Real Presence differed essentially from what had
been expressed in 1530. The wording was as follows:
+ Edition of 1530: "Concerning the Lord's Supper, they teach
that the body and blood of Christ are truly present, and are
distributed (communicated) to those that eat in the Lord's
Supper; and they disapprove of those that teach otherwise."
+ Edition of 1540: "Concerning the Lord's Supper, they teach
that with bread and wine are truly exhibited the body and
blood of Christ to those that eat in the Lord's Supper."
Johann Eck was the first to call attention to the change, in a
conference at Worms, 1541. Debates followed, and the
Ubiquitarian controversy arose, the question being: Is the body
of Christ in the Eucharist, and if so, why? The Confession of
1540 was known as the Reformed doctrine. To this Melanchthon,
with his adherents, subscribed, and maintained that Christ's
body was not in the Eucharist. For, the Eucharist was
everywhere, and it was impossible, they contended, for a body to
be in many places simultaneously. Adopting Luther's false
interpretation of the communicatio idiomatum, Brenz argued that
the attributes of the Divine Nature had been communicated to the
humanity of Christ which thus was deified. If deified, it was
everywhere, ubiquitous, just as His divinity, and therefore
really present in the Eucharist. Brenz was in harmony with
Catholic Faith as to the fact, but not as to the explanation.
His assertion that Christ's human nature had been deified, and
that His body was in the Eucharist as it was elsewhere, was
heretical. Christ, as God, is everywhere, but His body and
blood, soul and divinity, are in the Eucharist in a different,
special manner (sacramentally). In 1583, Chemnitz, who had
unconsciously been defending the Catholic doctrine, calmed the
discussion by his adhesion to absolute Ubiquitarianism. In 1616
the heresy arose again as Kenoticism and Crypticism, but sank
into oblivion in the troubles of the Thirty Years War.
JOSEPH HUGHES
Ucayali
Ucayali
(SAN FRANCISCO DE UCAYALI.)
Prefecture Apostolic in Peru.
At the request of the Peruvian Government, desirous of
civilizing and converting the Indian tribes inhabiting a large
and secluded mountainous region in the east of Peru, known as La
Montana, in which a few Franciscan missionaries had been
labouring, the Holy See on 5 February, 1900, erected the
district in to three prefectures Apostolic, depending directly
on Propaganda. The central prefecture, San Francisco de Ucayali,
remained under the control of the Franciscans, who were placed
under the immediate jurisdiction of their master-general. The
prefecture comprises (a) Chauchamayo, the district drained by
the Perene and Pachitea, together with the Gran Pajonal to its
eastern valleys, and as far as the Tambo and the upper Ucayali;
(b) Apurimac, the territory drained by the Ene, Mantaro, and
Tambo, as far as the confluence of the latter and the Urubamba;
(c) Ucayali, the region drained by the Ucayali to the meeting of
the Tambo and Urubamba. The Indians belong to the Amuescho,
Chipivi, and Cunivi tribes, 5140 being Catholics. The mission
contains 12 priests, 10 lay brothers, 6 chief stations, 24
churches and chapels, 6 having resident pastors; 11 schools. The
first prefect Apostolic, R.P. Augustin Alemany (14 February,
1905), was succeeded by R. P. Bernardo Irastorza (September,
1905). To prevent disputes concerning the jurisdictional limits
of the neighbouring prelates, Propaganda decreed that the
mission was confined strictly to the forest districts.
A.A. MACERLEAN
Uccello
Uccello
Painter, born at Florence, 1397; died there, 1475. His real name
was Paolo di Dono, but from his love of painting birds he
received the nickname of Uccello, and has been most frequently
called by that name ever since. He was apprenticed to Ghiberti,
and was one of the assistants engaged in preparing the first
pair of bronze gates made for the baptistery in Florence. Vasari
tells us that his special love was for geometry and perspective.
Manetti taught him geometry, but where he learned painting we do
not know, nor are we acquainted with the reasons which led him
to leave the botega of Ghiberti and set up for himself. Vasari
scoffs at Uccello's study of perspective, regarding it as waste
of time, and saying that the artist became "more needy than
famous". His skill in foreshortening and proportion, and in some
of the complex difficulties of perspective, was quite
remarkable, and his pictures for this reason alone are well
worth careful study, for they display an extraordinary knowledge
of geometric perspective. His most important work is the
colossal equestrian figure of Sir John Hawkwood, a chiaroscuro
in terraverde, intended to imitate a stone statue, seen aloft,
standing out from the wall of the cathedral. One of the most
precious possessions of the National Gallery, London, is a
battle-picture by this artist. For a long time this was wrongly
entitled the "Battle of Sant' Egidio of 1416", but it really
represents the rout of San Romano of 1432. Instead of Malatesta,
the picture gives us a representation of Nicolo da Tolentino.
Mr. Herbert Horne gave considerable attention to the history of
this picture some twelve years ago, and was able to arrive at a
very accurate determination regarding it. There are very few
paintings by Uccello in existence, although he must have painted
a considerable number. There is a panel by him in the Louvre,
containing his own portrait, associated with those of Giotto,
Donatello, Brunelleschi, and Manetti, representing perspective
associated with painting, sculpture, architecture, and geometry.
Many of the frescoes he executed for Santa Maria Novella have
been destroyed. The only other picture of his that need be
mentioned here is a predella in a church near Urbino, relating
to the theft of a pax, which is attributed to him by many
critics. He is said to have studied the works of Pisanello with
great advantage, and it is probable that it was from Pisanello
that he first learned painting, but he may be practically
regarded as one of the founders of the art of linear
perspective. There are very few dates known in his history
beyond those of his birth and death. But we know that in 1425 he
was at work at Venice, in 1436 painting his portrait of Sir John
Hawkwood, and in 1468 residing at Urbino.
GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON
Archdiocese of Udine
Archdiocese of Udine
(UTINENSIS)
The city of Udine, the capital of a province and archdiocese in
Friuli, northern Italy, is situated in a region mainly
agricultural. its cathedral, built in 1236 by the Patriarch
Bertoldo, was altered several times, most recently, in 1706,
through the munificence of the Manin family, whose tombs adorn
the choir. It contains paintings by Pordenone, Tiepolo (chapel
of the Blessed Sacrament), Matteo da Verona, etc.; statutes by
Torretto (St. Bertrand), Linardi (Pius IX), Minisini (Archbishop
Bricato). In the baptistery is a font by Giovanni da Zuglio
(1480) and paintings by Tiepolo. The oldest church at Udine is
that of S. Maria di Castello, transformed in the sixteenth
century. S. Antonio Abbate contains the tombs of the patriarchs
Francesco and Ermolao Barbaro; SS. Filippo e Giacomo, statutes
by Contieri; S. Peitro Martire and the Zitelle e S. Chiara
contain noteworthy pictures; the Madonna delle Grazie preserves
a much venerated Byzantine Madonna and is rich in sculpture and
paintings. Among the profane edifices, the Castelo, which
acquired its present form in 1517, was the residence of the
patriarchs of Aquileia, then of the Venetian governor, and is
now a barrack; it contains a great parliament chamber painted by
Amalteo, Tiepolo, and others. The city hall (1457), the work of
Nicolo Lionello, in a sober and graceful Gothic style, is rich
in paintings by the most celebrated Venetian masters, as is also
the archiepiscopal palace, built by the Patriarch Francesco
Barbaro, especially remarkable for the salon of Giovanni da
Udine. The city hospital was built in 1782 by Archbishop
Gradenigo. Many of the private residences also are rich in works
of art.
Where the city of Udine now stands there existed, in the Roman
period, a fortified camp, probably for the defence of the Via
Julia Agusta leading from Aguileia to the Carnic Alps. Narses
also made use of this fort after the Gothic War. No mention,
however, is found of Utinum until 983, when Otho II granted its
stronghold to Radoalso, Patriarch of Aquileia, Prince of Friuli
and Istria. A centre of population went on forming here from
that time, and successive patriarchs provided it with
water-supply and other institutions. The population was notably
increased by the arrival of Tuscan exiles in the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries. In the thirteenth century the patriarch
was represented by a gastaldo, while twelve nobles and twelve
commons represented the people in the government. The privileges
of the citizens were augmented by the Patriarchs Ramondo della
Torre (1291) and Bertrando di Saint Genais (1340) on account of
the loyalty displayed by the Udinese in the wars against the
Visconti of Milan and against the small feudatories. As early as
the thirteenth century Udine was the ordinary residence of the
patriarchs, and in 1348, when Aquileia was destroyed by an
earthquake, the see was definitively transferred to Udine. In
1381 the city opposed Cardinal Philip of Alencon, who had been
given the See of Aquileia in commendam; they wished to have an
effective prince and patriarch, and the consequent war ended
only with the cardinal's renunciation (1387). There was also a
popular rising against Giovanni, Margrave of Moravia, who wished
to revise the Constitution. In 1420 Udine, after a long siege,
surrendered to the Venetians, and thenceforward it belonged to
the republic, being the capital of Friuli. However, it retained
in substance its ancient form of government. Udine was the
birthplace of the military leaders Savorgnano and Colloredo and
the painters Giovanni da Udine, Pellegrino da S. Daniele,
Giovanni di Martino, and Odorico Politi.
In 1752 the Patriarchate of Aquileia was suppressed, and the two
Archbishoprics of Udina and Gorizia were formed, the former
embracing that part of the patriarchate which was subject to the
Republic of Venice. The first archbishop was Daniele Dolfin
(1752- 62), who retained the title of patriarch. In 1818 Udine
became a bishopric, subject to the metropolitan See of Venice;
Pius IX, however, in 1846, re-established the Archbishopric of
Udine, though without suffragans. The archdiocese contains 201
parishes, with 438,000 souls; 703 priests, 3 houses of male and
6 of female religious; 2 educational establishments for boys,
and 6 for girls.
CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, VIII; CICONI, Udine e sua
provincia (Udine, 1862).
U. BENIGNI
Diocese of Ugento
Diocese of Ugento
(UXENTIN)
The city of Ugento, with its small harbour, is situated in the
Province of Leece, in Apulia, on the Gulf of Tarentum. It is the
ancient Uxentum, and claims to have been founded by Uxens, who
is mentioned in the Eighth Book of the AEneid. In ancient times
it was an important city. In 1537 it was destroyed by the Turks.
Under the Byzantine domination it had Greek bishops. Of the
Latin bishops the first known was the Benedictine Simeon, of
unknown date.
Others worthy of mention are: St. Charles Borromeo (1530-37);
Antonio Sebastiano Minturno, poet (1559); the Carmelite
Desiderio Mazzapica (1566), who was distinguished at the Council
of Trent; and the great canonist Agostino Barbosa (1649). In
1818 the diocese of Alessano (the ancient Leuca) was united to
that of Ugento. The Greek rite flourished in many places in this
diocese until 1591, when it was abolished by Bishop Ercole
lancia. The diocese is suffragan of Otranto, and contains 30
parishes, 60,000 souls, 129 priests, secular and regular, 1
house of male religious, 4 houses of female religious, and 3
schools for girls.
CAPPELLETI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XXI.
U. BENIGNI
Ferdinando Ughelli
Ferdinando Ughelli
Historian, born at Florence, 21 March, 1595; died 19 May, 1670.
Having entered the Cistercian Order in his native city, he was
sent to the Gregorian University, Rome, where he studied under
the Jesuits, Francesco Piccolomini and John de Lugo. He filled
many important posts in his order, being Abbot of Settimo
(Florence), and from 1638 Abbot of Tre Fontane, Rome. He was
skilled in ecclesiastical history. To encourage him in this work
and to defray the expense of the journeys it entaile d Alexander
VII granted him an annual pension of 500 scudi. He was a
consultor of the Index and theologian to Cardinal Carlo
de'Medici, and was frequently offered the episcopal dignity,
which he refused to accept. He was buried in his abbatial ch
urch. His chief work is "Italia sacra sive de episcopis Italae"
(9 vols., Rome, 1643-62), abridged by Ambrogio Lucenti (Rome,
1704); re-edited with corrections and additions by Nicola Coleti
(Venice, 1717-22), with a tent! h volume. In compiling this
work, he frequently had to deal with matters not previously
treated by historians; as a result, the "Italia sacra", owing to
the imperfections of historical science in Ughelli's day,
especially from the point of view of criticism and diplomatics,
contains serious errors, particularly as the author was more
intent on collecting than on weighing documents. Nevertheless
his work with all its imperfections was necessary to facilitate
the labours of critical historians of a later day, and is
consulted even now. Among his other writings are:
+ "Cardinalium elogia ex sacro ordine cisterciensi" (Florence,
1624), on the writers and saints of his order and the papal
privileges granted to it;
+ "Columnensis familiae cardinalium imagines" (Rome,1650), and
genealogical works on the "Counts of Marsciano" and the
"Capizucchi" (Rome, 1667,1653);
+ "Aggiunte" to the "Vitae pontificum" of Ciaconius.
In the last volume of the "Italia sacra" he published various
historical sources until then unedited.
U. BENIGNI
Uhtred
Uhtred
(Also spelled: Uhtred or Owtred), an English Benedictine
theologian and writer, born at Boldon, North Durham, about 1315;
died at Finchale Abbey, 24 Jan., 1396. He joined the
Benedictines of Durham Abbey about 1332 and was sent to London
in 1337. Three years later he entered Durham College, a house
which the Durham Benedictines had established at Oxford for
those of their members who pursued their studies at the
University of Oxford. He was graduated there as licentiate in
1352 and as doctor in 1357. During the succeeding ten years, and
even previously, he took part in numerous disputations at Oxford
University, many of which were directed against members of the
mendicant orders. It is on this account that Bale (loc. cit.
below) wrongly designates him as a supporter of Wyclif. In 1367
he became prior of Finchale Abbey, a position to which he was
appointed three other times, in 1379, 1386, and 1392. In 1368
and in 1381 he was subprior at Durham Abbey. Along with Wyclif
he was one of the delegates sent by Edward III to the papal
representatives at Bruges in 1374, with the purpose of reaching
an agreement concerning the vexed question of canonical
provision in England. In the same year he represented Durham
Abbey at a council held by Edward, Prince of Wales, for the
purpose of determining whether the king was obliged to recognize
the papal suzerainty which had been granted to Innocent III by
King John. On this occasion Uhtred defended the pope's right of
overlordship, but, when on the following day the assembly cast
its vote contrarily, he followed their example. Among his
literary works, none of which have as yet been printed, are
worthy of mention: "De substantialibus regulae monachalis",
preserved in the Durham Cathedral Library; "Contra querelas
Fratrum", written about 1390, extant in the British Museum; and
a Latin translation of the "Ecclesiastical History" of Eusebius,
which is also preserved in the British Museum.
MICHAEL OTT
Cornelius Ujejski
Cornelius Ujejski
Polish poet, born at Beremiany, Galicia, 1823; died at
Cholojewie, 1897. His father was a prosperous landowner, member
of an ancient noble family. Cornelius completed his studies at
Lemberg, and while still a student at the university there wrote
"Maraton" (1843), a patriotic lyric poem of excellent form. In
1846, at the instigation of the Austrian Government, the
Galician peasants massacred several thousand of the nobility.
Ujejski then gave utterance to the universal feeling of
indignation in his powerful poem "Choral", which has become the
national hymn of Poland. At Paris, 1847, he published a volume
of poems entitled "Skargi Jeremiego" (Lamentations of Jeremias).
He made the acquaintance of the most distinguished men in the
Polish colony at Paris, among them Mickiewicz, and devoted
himself with youthful ardor to the poet Julius Slowacki. In 1848
he returned home, and won great popularity. He was regarded and
beloved by the people as their national poet. Ujejski wrote a
number of other poems of fine sentiment and perfect poetical
form, among them "Kwiaty bez woni" (Flowers without perfume),
1848, and "Zwiedle liscie" (Faded leaves) in 1849. In 1852 he
published a second volume of poems entitled "Melodye Biblijne"
(Biblical Melodies). Ujejski never achieved anything finer than
his youthful works, though his later poems are distinguished by
strong patriotic feeling, elegance of form, and fine poetic
taste.
S. TARNOWSKI
Kaspar Ulenberg
Kaspar Ulenberg
Convert, theological writer and translator of the Bible, born at
Lippstadt on the Lippe, Westphalia, in 1549; died at Cologne, 16
Feb., 1617. He was the son of Lutheran parents and was intended
for the Lutheran ministry. He received his grammar-school
education in Lippstadt, Soest, and Brunswick, and from 1569
studied theology at Wittenberg. While studying Luther's writings
there his first doubts as to the truth of the Lutheran doctrines
were awakened, and were then increased by hearing the disputes
between the Protestant theologians and by the appearance of
Calvinism in Saxony. After completing his studies he taught for
a short time in the Latin school at Lunden in Dithmarschen; he
was then sent by his family to Cologne to bring back to
Protestantism a kinsman who had become Catholic. After
accomplishing this task he remained in Cologne, where, through
his friendship with Johann Nopelius and Gerwin Calenius
(Catholic countrymen of his), he had an opportunity of becoming
acquainted with Catholic life and teaching. In 1572 he became a
Catholic, and soon afterwards, upon obtaining degrees in
philosophy at the University of Cologne, became professor at the
Gymnasium Laurentianum at Cologne. In 1575 he was ordained
priest and became parish priest at Kaiserswerth. In 1583 he was
made parish priest of St. Cunibert's in Cologne, where he
laboured zealously by preaching and catechetical exercises, and
made many conversions. In 1593 he became regent of the
Laurentian gymnasium, retaining this position for twenty-two
years. From 1600 to 1606 he directed the education of princes
Wilhelm and Hermann of Baden, sons of Margrave Edward Fortunatus
of Baden-Baden. In 1605 he became parish priest of St. Columba's
in Cologne, and from 1610 to 1612 was also rector of the
university.
Ulenberg began his literary career at Kaiserwerth with the work,
"Die Psalmen David's in allerlei deutsche Gesangreime gebracht"
(Cologne, 1582), an excellent hymn book for the common people,
which was widely circulated and often reprinted; the last and
revised edition was by M. Kaufmann (Augsburg, 1835). To the
first edition was appended a "Katechismus oder kurzer Bericht
der ganzen christl. kathol. Religion sammt Warnung wider
allerlei unserer Zeit Irrthumb". He completed at Cologne (1589)
his chief theological work, "Erhebliche und wichtige Ursachen,
warumb die altglaeubige Catholische Christen bei dem alten
wahren Christenthumb bis in ihren Tod bestaendiglich verharren",
of which he also issued a Latin edition entitled: "Causae graves
et justae, cur Catholicis in communione veteris ejusque veri
Christianismi constanter usque ad finem vitae permanendum, cur
item omnibus, qui se Evangelicos vocant, relictis erroribus ad
ejusdem Christianismi consortium vel postliminio redeundum sit".
This is one of the best controversial treatises of the sixteenth
century and is still instructive reading. A new and revised
edition was prepared by M.W. Kerp entitled: "Zweiundzwanzig
Beweggruende. Ein buch fuer Katholische und Evangelische"
(Mainz, 1827, 1833, and 1840). Other works worthy of mention
are:
+ "Trostbuch fuer die Kranken und Sterbenden" (Cologne, 1590),
often reprinted;
+ "Historia de vita, moribus, rebus gestis, studiis ac denique
morte Praedicantium Lutheranorum, D. Martini Lutheri, Philippi
Melanchthonis, Matthiae Flacii Illyrici, Georgii Maioris, et
Andraea Osiandri", which was edited after Ulenberg's death by
Arnold Meshovius (1622), a German edition being issued at
Mainz (2 vols., 1836-37).
+ Ulenberg also wrote various shorter polemical and ascetical
treatises. His last and most important literary work (Sacra
Biblia, das ist, die gantze Heilige Schrifft, Alten und Neuen
Testaments, nach der letzten Roemisch Sixtiner Edition mit
fleiss uebergesetxt), the German translation of the Bible, he
began (1614) at the request of the Archbishop and Elector of
Cologne, Ferdinand Duke of Bavaria, and finished shortly
before his death. The first edition appeared at Cologne in
1630; eleven other editions were published at Cologne up to
1747, and eleven more at Nuremberg, Bamberg, Frankfort, and
Vienna.
+ The German Bible which was published (Mainz, 1662) at the
command of the Archbishop and Elector of Mainz, Johann Philip
Count of Schoenborn, was a revision of Ulenberg's translation.
This revision, entitled "Die catholische Mainzer Bibel", is
still frequently printed and until Allioli's translation
appeared was the most popular German translation of the Bible.
FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT
Ulfilas
Ulfilas
(Also: Ulphilas), apostle of the Goths, missionary, translator
of the Bible, and inventor of an alphabet, born probably in 311;
died at Constantinople in 380 or 381. Though Ulfilas in speech
and sympathies was thoroughly Gothic, he was descended not from
Teutonic ancestors, but from Cappadocians captured, in the
reigns of Valerian and Gallienus, during the raids in Asia Minor
made by the Goths from the north of the Danube. There seems to
be no valid reason for thinking Ulfilas was not born a Christian
(Hodgkin places his conversion during his residence at
Constantinople). As a young man he was sent to that city either
as a hostage or an ambassador, and, after occupying for some
time the position of lector in the church, he was consecrated
bishop in his thirtieth year by the celebrated Arian bishop of
Nicomedia, Eusebius. Shortly after his consecration he returned
to Dacia and during the remaining forty years of his life he
laboured among his fellow-countrymen as a missionary. The first
eight or ten years of his missionary life were spent in Dacia,
after which because of the persecution of his pagan countrymen
he was compelled with many of his Christian converts to seek
refuge in Moesia. It was at this period in his life that he
conceived the idea of translating the Bible into the language of
the Goths, a task demanding as a preliminary that he should
invent a special alphabet. His familiarity with Greek made the
task comparatively simple, only a few letters being borrowed
from other sources, Runic or Latin. Despite his many other
activities Ulfilas translated "all the books of Scripture with
the exception of the Books of Kings, which he omitted because
they are a mere narrative of military exploits, and the Gothic
tribes were especially fond of war, and were in more need of
restraints to check their military passions than of spurs to
urge them on to deeds of war" (Philostorgius, "Hist. eccl.", II,
5). The Books of the Old Testament were translated from the
Septuagint; those of the New Testament from the original Greek.
Ulfilas was at the Synod of Constantinople in 360 when the sect
of Acacius triumphed and issued its compromise creed as a
substitute for the formularies of the Orthodox as well as the
Arian parties. It is unfortunate that the career of Ulfilas was
marred by his adherence to the Arian heresy. It may be said in
extenuation of this fault that he was a victim of circumstances
in coming under none but Arian and semi-Arian influences during
his residence at Constantinople; but he persisted in the error
until the end of his life. The lack of orthodoxy deprived the
work of Ulfilas of permanent influence and wrought havoc among
some of his Teutonic converts. His labours were impressed not
only on the Goths, but on other Teutonic peoples, and because of
the heretical views they entertained they were unable to
maintain themselves in the kingdoms which they established. Only
a few chapters of Ulfilas's translation of the Old Testament are
in existence. Of the New Testament we have the greater portion
of the Gospels in the beautiful Silver Codex (a purple parchment
with silver and gold letters) now at Upsala, and dating from the
fifth century perhaps; nearly all of St. Paul's Epistles in a
Milanese Codex edited by Cardinal Mai, and a large fragment of
the Epistles to the Romans on a Wofenbuettel palimpsest.
PATRICK J. HEALY
William Bernard Ullathorne
William Bernard Ullathorne
English Benedictine monk and bishop, b. at Pocklington,
Yorkshire, 7 May, 1806; d. at Oscott, Warwickshire, 21 March,
1889. His father was a lineal descendant from [Saint] Thomas
More, but had fallen in life and was then the chief tradesman of
the village. His mother, a distant connection of Sir John
Franklin, the Arctic explorer, was a convert. When he was ten
years old, the whole family removed to Scarborough, where young
Ullathorne made his first acquaintance with the sea. His lively
imagination and adventurous spirit led him to desire to be on
the ocean and to see the world; and for three and a half years
his wish was gratified, during which time he made several
voyages in the Mediterranean and the Baltic Sea and elsewhere.
It was on one of these voyages that a chance opportunity of
attending Mass at Memel, a port in the Baltic, proved the
turning-point of his life, for he then and there made up his
mind to devote his life to the service of God. On his return to
England, therefore, he entered as a novice of the well- known
Benedictine community at Downside, near Bath, in February, 1823.
He received the habit in March, 1824, and was professed a year
later, taking the name of Bernard. Later on he spent a year as
prefect at Ampleforth College, near York, and was ordained
priest at Ushaw College in 1831. Soon after his return to
Downside, in response to an invitation from Dr. Morris, O.S.B.,
Vicar Apostolic of the Mauritius, Ullathorne offered himself as
a volunteer for the Australian mission, which then formed part
of that vicariate. His offer was accepted, and in view of the
difficulty there had always been of governing the colony from
such a distance, Dr. Morris gave him full powers as his
vicar-general there.
Ullathorne landed in Australia in February, 1833, and his
connection with the colony lasted eight years. During the first
part of that time he devoted himself to organizing the
beginnings of the mission there. When he first landed there were
only three priests, Father Therry and Father McEncroe at Sydney,
and Father Connolly in Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania). At both
places they were working independently and without any kind of
supervision. There were internal dissensions among the
Catholics, as well as difficulties with the colonial
authorities, both due to the want of proper ecclesiastical
government. Ullathorne, by his tact and strength of character,
soon succeeded in adjusting these, both at Sydney and in
Tasmania. He likewise visited the convict settlement on Norfolk
Island, which he describes as "the most beautiful spot in the
universe", and his ministrations to those who were condemned to
death, as well as to the others, had most consoling results. In
1835 Bishop Polding, O.S.B., arrived as Vicar Apostolic of
Australia, accompanied by three priests and four ecclesiastical
students. Ullathorne, being thus set free, set out soon
afterwards to visit England and Ireland, to obtain further help
for the mission. During his stay he was called upon to give
evidence before the Parliamentary Commission on the evils of
transportation, and, at the request of the Government, he wrote
a tract on the subject. He was also summoned to Rome, at the
instance of Cardinal Weld, to report on the state of the
Australian mission.
In 1838 he once more set sail for Sydney, with several priests
and nuns who had offered themselves for the work. On his
landing, he found himself the centre of obloquy, on account of
his evidence on the convict question, for it was supposed to be
detrimental to the colony, which thrived on the free labour of
the convicts. Nevertheless, his views in the end prevailed, and
transportation was abolished. In 1840 Ullthorne left Australia,
as it turned out, for good, travelling to England in company
with Bishop Polding. He had already drawn out a scheme for a
regular hierarchy, rendered possible by the remarkable and rapid
increase in numbers and organization, and when Dr. Polding went
to Rome he obtained its substantial adoption. Dr. Polding
himself became Archbishop of Sydney; but though Ullathorne was
more than once pressed to accept a bishopric there, he remained
staunch in his refual, and retired to the mission of Coventry.
Here he used his energy in building a handsome new church; but
after a stay of three years he had once more to move, being
appointed Vicar Apostolic of the Western District of England,
with the title of Bishop of Hetalona. Two years later, however,
he was transferred to the Central District, in which he was
destined to spend the remaining forty-one years of his life. He
soon acquired influence among his brother bishops, and in 1848
he went to Rome as their delegate, to negotiate the restoration
of the English hierarchy--a task for which he was specially
qualified, in view of the part he had taken in the similar
scheme already carried out in Australia.
His negotiations were successful, and after a delay of two
years, due to the Revolution in Rome, the new English hierarchy
was proclaimed by Pius IX on 29 September, 1850. Cardinal
Wiseman became the first Archbishop of Westminster, Dr.
Ullathorne being appointed Bishop of Birmingham. He ruled that
diocese for thirty-seven years. On the death of Cardinal
Wiseman, he was chosen by Propaganda to succeed him; but Pius IX
overruled their choice and appointed Cardinal Manning, and Dr.
Ullathorne remained at Birmingham. He took part in all the four
provincial synods of Westminster, and in 1870 he attended the
Vatican Council; but for the most part his episcopate was free
from incident beyond the steady growth and administration of his
diocese. When he first took up his residence in the Midlands, he
found the finances in a deplorable condition: he lived to see
his diocese thoroughly organized, and many new missions
established, as well as new communities of men, the most famous
of which was [Ven. John Henry] Newman's Congregation of
Oratorians at Edgbaston. Oscott was at that time a mixed
college, and in 1873 Bishop Ullathorne established a regular
diocesan seminary--St. Bernard's, Olton. He also devoted himself
in a special manner to the convents of his diocese, in all of
which he took a personal interest. One of his chief assistants
was the well-known Mother Margaret Hallahan, who founded a
convent of the Dominican Order at Stone, from which there were
several branch houses. In 1888 Dr. Ullathorne obtained leave
from the Holy See to resign his diocese, being given the title
of Archbishop of Cabasa. He retired to Oscott College, where he
died the following year on the feast of St. Benedict, and was
buried in St. Dominic's Convent, Stone.
His chief works, written during his last years, are: "Endowments
of Man" (London, 1880); "Groundwork of Christian Virtues"
(1882); "Christian Patience" (1886). He also published "Reply to
Judge Burton on Religion in Australia" (Sydney, 1835); "La
Salette" (1854); "The Immaculate Conception" (1855); "History of
Restoration of English Hierarchy" (1871); "The Dollingerites"
(1874); "Answer to Gladstone's 'Vatican Decrees'" (1875); and a
large number of sermons, pastorals, pamphlets, etc.
For the first half of his life (to 1850), see his Autobiography,
edited after his death by THEODOSIA DRANE, of Stone Convent
(1891); for the second half, see his Letters, edited by the same
(1892).
Other authorities: COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; GILLOW,
Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v., with fuller enumeration of
Ullathorne's works; MAZIERE BRADY, Catholic Hierarchy; Bishop
Ullathorne Number of The Oscotian (London, 1886); GLANCEY,
Characteristics from the Writings of Archbishop Ullathorne
(London, 1889); KENNY, Hist. of Catholicity in Australia (1886);
PURCELL, Life of Manning (London, 1896); WARD, Life of Wiseman
(London, 1897); BIRT, Benedictine Pioneers in Australia (London,
1911); WARD, Life of Newman (London, 1912).
BERNARD WARD
Richard Ullerston
Richard Ullerston
B. in the Duchy of Lancaster, England; d. in August or
September, 1423. Having been ordained priest in December, 1383,
he became fellow of Queen's College, Oxford (1391-1403), holding
office in the college, and proceeding doctor of divinity in
1394. In 1408 he became chancellor of the university and in the
same year wrote at the request of the Bishop of Salisbury a
sketch of proposed ecclesiastical reforms: "Petitiones pro
ecclesiae militantis reformatione". He also wrote a commentary
on the Creed (1409), one on the Psalms (1415), another on the
Canticle of Canticles (1415), and "Defensorium donationis
ecclesiasticae", a work in defence of the donation of
Constantine. At the request of Archbishop Courtenay he wrote a
treatise, "De officio militari", addressed to Henry, Prince of
Wales. From 1403 he held the prebend of Oxford in Salisbury
cathedral, and from 1407 the rectory of Beeford in Yorkshire.
TANNER, Bibl. Brit.-Heb. (London, 1748); A WOOD, Hist. and
Antiq. of Oxford (Oxford, 1792-6); PITTS, De illust. Angliae
scriptoribus (Paris, 1619).
EDWIN BURTON
Antoine de Ulloa
Antonio de Ulloa
Naval officer and scientist, born at Seville, Spain, 12 Jan.,
1716; died near Cadiz, Spain, 5 July, 1795. He entered the navy
in 1733. In 1735 he was appointed with Jorge Juan, another young
Spaniard, a member of a scientific expedition which the French
Academy of Sciences was sending to Peru to measure a degree of
the meridian at the equator. They remained there for nearly ten
years. In 1745, having finished their scientific labours, he and
Jorge Juan prepared to return to Spain, agre eing to travel on
different ships in order to minimize the danger of losing the
important fruits of their labours. The ship upon which Ulloa was
travelling was captured by the British, and he was taken as a
prisoner to England. In that country, through his scientific
attainments, he gained the friendship of the men of science, and
was made a Fellow of the Royal Society of London. In a short
time, through the influence of the president of this society, he
was released ! and was able to return to Spain. He became
prominent as a scientist and was appointed to serve on various
important scientific commissions. In 1766 he was sent as
Governor to "La Florida Occidental" (Louisiana), where he
remained two years, and in 1779 he became lieutenant-general of
the na val forces. He is to be credited with the establishment
of the first museum of natural history, the first metallurgical
laboratory in Spain, and the observatory of Cadiz. As a result
of his scientific work in Peru, he published (Madrid, 1784)
"Relacion historica del viaje a la America Meridional", which
contains a full, accurate, and clear description of the greater
part of South America geographically, and of its inhabitants and
natural history. In collaboration with the Jorge Juan mentioned
above, he also wrote "Noticias secretas de America", giving
valuable information regarding the early religious orders in
Spanish America. This work was published by David Barry in
London, 1826.
VENTURA FUENTES
Francisco de Ulloa
Francisco de Ulloa
Died 1540. It is not known when he came to Mexico nor if he
accompanied Hernan Cortes in his first expedition to California.
Authorities are divided upon these questions. Diaz del Castillo
relates that during the absence of Cortes, his wife, Dona Juana
de Zuniga (Juneja), sent letters to him by Ulloa, begging him to
return. Ulloa, in charge of two ships loaded with provisions,
reached Cortes when he was sorely straitened, and he returned to
Mexico in 1537. Ulloa soon followed. Eager for new discoveries,
Cortes undertook an expedition at his own expense in 1538,
dispatching a fleet of three boats under the command of
Francisco de Ulloa. According to Clavigero, Ulloa sailed along
the coasts of the California peninsula until he was obliged by
the scarcity of provisions to return to New Spains, where, in
1540, according to Diaz del Castillo, he was stabbed by a
soldier and killed. Other historians relate, however, that of
the three boats which sailed from the port of Acapulco the "S.
Tomas" was soon lost; the "S. Agueda" was obliged to seek port
in Manzanillo to repair damages, was afterwards driven by a
tempest to the shores of Culiacan, where it joined the
"Trinidad," returning shortly with the discontented members of
the expedition, and the ship "Trinidad," under command of Ulloa,
was lost, no trace having been found of her.
CAMILLUS CRIVELLI
St. Ulrich
St. Ulrich
Bishop of Augsburg, born at Kyburg, Zurich, Switzerland, in 890;
died at Augsburg, 4 July, 973. He was the son of Count Hucpald
and Thetbirga, and was connected with the dukes of Alamannia and
the imperial family of the Ottos. As a child he was sickly; when
old enough to learn he was sent to the monastic school of St.
Gall, where he proved to be an excellent scholar. He resolved to
enter the priesthood, but was in doubt whether to enter the
Benedictine Abbey of St. Gall or to become a secular priest. He
was sent before April, 910, for his further training to
Adalbero, Bishop of Augsburg, who made him a chamberlain. On
Adalbero's death (28 April, 910) Ulrich returned home, where he
remained until the death of Bishop Hiltine (28 November, 923).
Through the influence of his uncle, Duke Burchard of Alamannia,
and other relatives, Ulrich was appointed Bishop of Augsburg by
King Henry, and was consecrated on 28 Dec., 923. He proved
himself to be a ruler who united severity with gentleness. He
sought to improve the low moral and social condition of the
clergy, and to enforce a rigid adherence to the laws of the
Church. Ulrich hoped to gain this end by periodical visitations,
and by building as many churches as possible, to make the
blessings of religion more accessible to the common people. His
success was largely due to the good example he set his clergy
and diocese. For the purpose of obtaining relics he went on two
journeys to Rome, in 910, and in 952 or 953.
Ulrich demanded a high moral standard of himself and others. A
hundred years after his death, a letter apparently written by
him, which opposed celibacy, and supported the marriage of
priests, suddenly appeared. The forger of the letter counted on
the opinion of the common people, who would regard celibacy as
unjust if St. Ulrich, known for the rigidity of his morals,
upheld the marriage of priests (cf. "Analecta Boll.", XXVII,
1908, 474). Ulrich was also steadfastly loyal, as a prince of
the empire, to the emperor. He was one of the most important
props of the Ottonian policy, which rested mainly upon the
ecclesiastical princes. He constantly attended the judicial
courts held by the king and in the diets. He even took part in
the Diet held on 20 September, 972, when he defended himself
against the charge of nepotism in regard to his nephew Adalbero,
whom he had appointed his coadjutor on account of his own
illness and desire to retire to a Benedictine abbey. During the
struggle between Otto I and his son Duke Ludolf of Swabia,
Ulrich had much to suffer from Ludolf and his partisans. When in
the summer of 954 father and son were ready to attack each other
at Illertissen in Swabia, at the last moment Ulrich and Bishop
Hartbert of Chur were able to mediate between Otto and Ludolf.
Ulrich succeeded in persuading Ludolf and Konrad, Otto's
son-in-law, to ask the king's pardon on 17 December, 954. Before
long the Magyars entered Germany, plundering and burning as they
went, and advanced as far as Augsburg, which they besieged with
the fury of barbarians. It was due to Ulrich's ability and
courage that Augsburg was able to hold out against the besiegers
until the Emperor Otto arrived. On 10 August, 955, a battle was
fought in the Lechfeld, and the invaders were finally defeated.
The later assertion that Ulrich himself took part in the battle
is incorrect, as Ulrich could not have broken through the ranks
of the Magyars, who were south of him, although north of the
emperor.
As morning dawned on 4 July, 973, Ulrich had ashes strewn on the
ground in the shape of a cross; the cross sprinkled with holy
water, and he was placed upon it. His nephew Richwin came with a
message and greeting from the Emperor Otto II as the sun rose,
and immediately upon this, while the clergy sang the Litany, St.
Ulrich passed away. His body was placed in the Church of St.
Afra, which had been rebuilt by him. The burial was performed by
Bishop Wolfgang of Ratisbon. Many miracles were wrought at his
grave; and in 993, he was canonized by John XV. As early as the
tenth century, there is a very beautiful miniature, in a
manuscript now in the library of Einsiedeln (no. 261, fol. 140).
Other miniatures are at the Royal Library of Munich, in
manuscripts of 1454 (Cgm., 94, fo. 26v, and Cgm., no. 751).
ULRICH SCHMID
Ulrich of Bamberg
Ulrich of Bamberg
(Udalricus Babenbergensis), a cleric of the cathedral church of
Bamberg, of whom nothing more is known than that he lived about
1100 at Bamberg. He is probably identical with the priest of
Bamberg of the same name (d. 7 July, 1127), wh o is often
mentioned in official documents and who bestowed large benefits
on the monastery of Michelsberg. Ulrich's work is called "Codex
epistolaris, continens variorum pontificum et imperatorum
Romanorum, ut et S.R.E. cardinalium et S.R.I. principum e
cclesiasticorum seculariumque epistolas". This collection of
documents was completed in 1125 and dedicated to Bishop Gebhard
of Wuerzburg. It contains letters from the year 900 on and was
undoubtedly intended for the training of chancellors and
statesmen, giving examples as models for the form of letters and
public documents. Numerous important letters and charters of
that period, which are preserved in it, offer rich material for
the history of the relations between the emperors and popes; in
particular the letters exchanged by Emperor Lothair, Henry the
Proud, and Innocent I give an animated and instructive picture
of conditions at that time. These letters also show how the
statesmen at the episcopal courts and probably also the bishops
were trained. After the collection had been closed by Ulrich
several supplements were added that extend to 1134; these
additional documents are generally addressed to Bishop Otto of
Bamberg.
PATRICIUS SCHLAGER
Ulrich of Richenthal
Ulrich of Richenthal
Chronicler of the Council of constance, date of birth unknown;
died about 1438. Ulrich was a citizen of Constance, well
educated and a good latinist. He was a landowner and a layman,
perhaps a son of the town clerk of Constance, Johannes
Richenthal, who lived in the second half of the fourteenth
century. During the session of the Ecumenical Council of
Constance Ulrich frequently came into connection with the
fathers assembled. He met the papal delegates who had to provide
quarters for the members of the council. He was employed in
business matters by princes who were present in the city during
the council, and a bishop lived in his house. Ulrich followed
the council, the great events that took place in it, the
festivities, and all the celebrations of which his native town
was the theatre. He wrote in the German dialect of Constance an
exact and careful account of all, introducing much statistical
matter. This chronicle is preserved in several manuscripts, of
which one at St. Petersburg is in Latin. The Manuscripts contain
coats-of-arms and other illustrations valuable for the history
of civilization.
J. P. KIRSCH
St. Ulrich of Zell
St. Ulrich of Zell
(Wulderic; called also of Cluny, and of Ratisbon), born at
Ratisbon, at the beginning of 1029; died at Zell, probably on 10
July, 1093. Feast, 14 July (10). Two lives of him are extant:
the first, written anonymously c. 1109 by a monk of Zell at the
request of Adalbert, a recluse near Ratisbon; the other, also
anonymous, written between 1109 and 1130. Particulars of his
life are also contained in his writings. His parents, pious and
rich, were Bernhold and Bucca, niece of Bishop Gebhard II.
Ulrich probably received his education at St. Emmeram, but in
1044 he was called to the court of his godfather, Henry IV, and
acted as page to the Empress Agnes. Ordained deacon by his uncle
Nidger, Bishop of Freising, he was made archdeacon of the
cathedral. On his return from a journey to Rome he distributed
his posessions to the poor, made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land,
and, after another short visit to Rome, entered the Abbey of
Cluny in 1061, during the reign of St. Hugo. Here he soon
excelled in piety and diligence, made his profession, was
ordained priest and appointed confessor to the convent at
Mareigny in the Diocese of Autun, and prior of the community of
men in the same place. Here he lost an eye and was obliged to
return to Cluny.
He was then named prior at Peterlingen (Payerne) in the Diocese
of Lausanne, but on account of troubles caused by Bishop
Burchard von Oltingen, a partisan of Henry IV, Ulrich again went
to Cluny, where he acted as adviser to his abbot. A nobleman had
donated to Cluny some property at Grueningen near Breisach, and
Ulrich was sent to inspect the place and eventually to lay the
foundation of a monastery. Not finding the locality suitable, he
with his monks in 1087 retired to Zell (Sell, Sella,
Villmarszelle) in the Black Forest, where the report of his
virtues soon brought him many disciples. He enjoyed the esteem
of Blessed Gebhard III, Bishop of Basle, who frequently visited
him. In 1090 he established a convent for nuns at Bolesweiler
(now Bollschweil), about a mile from Zell. God granted him the
gift of miracles. The last two years of his life he was blind.
He was buried in the cloister, but three years later his body
was brought into the church. His feast was celebrated for the
first time 14 July, 1139.
His life of Hermann von Zaehringen, Margrave of Baden, later a
monk of Cluny, is also lost. His "Consuetudines cluniacenses"
(in P.L., CXLIX, 657) were composed at the request of William,
Abbot of Hirschau, in three books. The first two, written
between 1079 and 1082, treat of liturgy and the education of
novices; the third, written not later than 1087, speaks of the
government of monasteries.
FRANCIS MERSHMAN
St. Ultan of Ardbraccan
St. Ultan of Ardbraccan
St. Ultan of Ardbraccan, Ireland, was the maternal uncle of St.
Brigid, and collected a life of that great Irish saint for his
pupil, St. Brogan Cloen of Rostuirc, on Ossory. There seems to
be some difficulty in his chronology inasmuch as the assumption
of his relation to St. Brigid must involve an extraordinary
longevity, namely 180 years, because his death is not chronicled
till 657. Windisch, however, explains away the seeming
inconsistency. The Irish Annals describe St. Ultan as of the
royal race of O'Connor, and he succeeded St. Breccan as
Abbot-Bishop of Ardbraccan about the year 570. From O'Clery's
"Irish Calendar" we learn that he educated and fed thousands of
poor students from all parts of Ireland. Of his literary powers
there are several specimens, among others, lives of St. Patrick
and St. Brigid. His exquisite Latin hymn of the latter saint,
commencing "Christus in nostra insula", is incorporated in the
Solesmes Chant books. The exact year of his death is uncertain,
the various annalists giving 653, 656, 657, and 662, but
probably we are safe in following the "Annals of Ulster",
wherein his obit is recorded under the year 657. He died on 4
September, on which day his feast has always been celebrated.
St. Ultan's Well is still at Ardbraccan.
W. H. GRATTAN-FLOOD
Ultramontanism
Ultramontanism
A term used to denote integral and active Catholicism, because
it recognizes as its spiritual head the pope, who, for the
greater part of Europe, is a dweller beyond the mountains (ultra
montes), that is, beyond the Alps. The term "ultramontane",
indeed, is relative: from the Roman, or Italian, point of view,
the French, the Germans, and all the other peoples north of the
Alps are ultramontanes, and technical ecclesiastical language
actually applies the word in precisely this sense. In the Middle
Ages, when a non-Italian pope was elected he was said to be a
papa ultramontano. In this sense the word occurs very frequently
in documents of the thirteenth century; after the migration to
Avignon, however, it dropped out of the language of the Curia.
In a very different sense, the word once more came into use
after the Protestant Reformation, which was, among other things,
a triumph of that ecclesiastical particularism, based on
political principles, which was formulated in the maxim: Cujus
regio, ejus religio. Among the Catholic governments and peoples
there gradually developed an analogous tendency to regard the
papacy as a foreign power; Gallicanism and all forms of French
and German regalism affected to look upon the Holy See as an
alien power because it was beyond the Alpine boundaries of both
the French kingdom and the German empire. This name of
Ultramontane the Gallicans applied to the supporters of the
Roman doctrines--whether that of the monarchical character of
the pope in the government of the Church or of the infallible
pontifical magisterium--inasmuch as the latter were supposed to
renounce "Gallican liberties" in favour of the head of the
Church who resided ultra montes. This use of the word was not
altogether novel; as early as the time of Gregory VII the
opponents of Henry IV in Germany had been called Ultramontanes
(ultramontani). In both cases the term was intended to be
opprobrious, or at least to convey the imputation of a failing
in attachment to the Ultramontane's own prince, or his country,
or his national Church.
In the eighteenth century the word passed from France back to
Germany, where it was adopted by the Febronians, Josephinists,
and Rationalists, who called themselves Catholics, to designate
the theologians and the faithful who were attached to the Holy
See. Thus it acquired a much wider signification, being
applicable to all Roman Catholics worthy of the name. The
Revolution adopted this polemical term from the old regime: the
"Divine State", formerly personified in the prince, now found
its personification in the people, becoming more "Divine" than
ever as the State became more and more laic and irreligious,
and, both in principle and in fact, denied any other God but
itself. In presence of this new form of the old state-worship,
the "Ultramontane" is the antagonist of the atheists as much as
the non-Catholic believers, if not more--witness the Bismarckian
Kulturkampf, of which the National Liberals rather than the
orthodox Protestants were the soul. Thus the word came to be
applied more especially in Germany from the earliest decades of
the nineteenth century. In the frequent conflicts between Church
and State the supporters of the Church's liberty and
independence as against the State are called Ultramontanes. The
Vatican Council naturally called forth numerous written attacks
upon Ultramontanism. When the Centre was formed as a political
party it was called by preference the Ultramontane party. In a
few years the "Anti-Ultramontane Reichsverband" came into
existence to combat the Centre and, at the same time,
Catholicism as a whole.
As our present purpose is to state what Ultramontanism is, it is
beside our scope to expound the Catholic doctrine on the power
of the Church and, in particular, of the pope, whether in
spiritual or temporal matters, these subjects being treated
elsewhere under their respective titles. It is sufficient here
to indicate what our adversaries mean by Ultramontanism. For
Catholics it would be superfluous to ask whether Ultramontanism
and Catholicism are the same thing: assuredly, those who combat
Ultramontanis are in fact combating Catholicism, even when they
disclaim the desire to oppose it. One of the recent adversaries
of Ultramontanism among Catholics was a priest, Professor Franz
Xaver Kraus, who says ("Spektatorbrief", II, quoted in the
article Ultramontanismus in "Realencycl. fuer prot. Theol. u.
Kirche", ed. 1908): "1. An Ultramontane is one who sets the idea
of the Church above that of religion; 2. ...who substitutes the
pope for the Church; 3. ...who believes that the kingdom of God
is of this world and that, as medieval curialism asserted, the
power of the keys, given to Peter, included temporal
jurisdiction also; 4. ...who believes that religious conviction
can be imposed or broken with material force; 5. ...who is ever
ready to sacrifice to an extraneous authority the plain teaching
of his own conscience." According to the definition given in
Leichtenberger, "Encycl. des sciences religieuses" (ed. 1882):
"The character of Ultramontanism is manifested chiefly in the
ardour with which it combats every movement of independence in
the national Churches, the condemnation which it visits upon
works written to defend that independence, its denial of the
rights of the State in matters of government, of ecclesiastical
administration and ecclesiastical control, the tenacity with
which it has prosecuted the declaration of the dogma of the
pope's infallibility and with which it incessantly advocates the
restoration of his temporal power as a necessary guarantee of
his spiritual sovereignty."
The war against Ultramontanism is accounted for not merely by
its adversaries' denial of the genuine Catholic doctrine of the
Church's power and that of her supreme ruler, but also, and even
more, by the consequences of that doctrine. It is altogether
false to attribute to the Church either political aims of
temporal dominion among the nations or the pretence that the
pope can at his own pleasure depose sovereigns that the Catholic
must, even in purely civil matters, subordinate his obedience
towards his own sovereign to that which he owes to the pope,
that the true fatherland of the Catholic is Rome, and so forth.
These are either pure inventions or malicious travesties. It is
neither scientific nor honest to attribute to "Ultramontanism"
the particular teaching of some theologian or some school of
times past; or to invoke certain facts in medieval history,
which may be explained by the peculiar conditions, or by the
rights which the popes possessed in the Middle Ages (for
example, their rights in conferring the imperial crown). For the
rest, it is sufficient to follow attentively, one by one, the
struggle kept up in their journals and books to be convinced
that this warfare by the Rationalist-Protestant-Modernist
coalition against "Clericalism" or "Ultramontanism" is,
fundamentally, directed against integral Catholicism--that is,
against papal, anti-Liberal, and counter-Revolutionary
Catholicism. (See also STATE AND CHURCH; FEBRONIANISM;
SYLLABUS.)
U. BENIGNI
Unam Sanctam
Unam Sanctam
(Latin the One Holy, i.e. Church), the Bull on papal supremacy
issued 18 November, 1302, by Boniface VIII during the dispute
with Philip the Fair, King of France. It is named from its
opening words (see BONIFACE VIII). The Bull was promulgated in
connection with the Roman Council of October, 1302, at which it
had probably been discussed. it is not impossible that Boniface
VIII himself revised the Bull; still it also appears that
Aegidius Colonna, Archibishop of Bourges, who had come to the
council at Rome notwithstanding the royal prohibition,
influenced the text. The original of the Bull is no longer in
existence; the oldest text is to be found in the registers of
Boniface VIII in the Vatican archives ["Reg. Vatic.", L, fol.
387]. It was also incorporated in the "Corpus juris canonici"
("Extravag. Comm.", I, vii, 1; ed. Friedberg, II, 1245). The
genuineness of the Bull is absolutely established by the entry
of it in the official registers of the papal Briefs, and its
incorporation in the canon law. The objections to its
genuineness raised by such scholars as Damberger, Mury, and
Verlaque are fully removed by this external testimony. At a
later date Mury withdrew his opinion.
The Bull lays down dogmatic propositions on the unity of the
Church, the necessity of belonging to it for eternal salvation,
the position of the pope as supreme head of the Church, and the
duty thence arising of submission to the pope in order to belong
to the Church and thus to attain salvation. The pope further
emphasizes the higher position of the spiritual in comparison
with the secular order. From these premises he then draws
conclusions concerning the relation between the spiritual power
of the Church and secular authority. The main propositions of
the Bull are the following: First, the unity of the Church and
its necessity for salvation are declared and established by
various passages from the Bible and by reference to the one Ark
of the Flood, and to the seamless garment of Christ. The pope
then affirms that, as the unity of the body of the Church so is
the unity of its head established in Peter and his successors.
Consequently, all who wish to belong to the fold of Christ are
placed under the dominion of Peter and his successors. When,
therefore, the Greeks and others say they are not subject to the
authority of Peter and his successors, they thus acknowledge
that they do not belong to Christ's sheep.
Then follow some principles and conclusions concerning the
spiritual and the secular power:
+ Under the control of the Church are two swords, that is two
powers, the expression referring to the medieval theory of the
two swords, the spiritual and the secular. This is
substantiated by the customary reference to the swords of the
Apostles at the arrest of Christ (Luke, xxii, 38; Matt., xxvi,
52).
+ Both swords are in the power of the Church; the spiritual is
wielded in the Church by the hand of the clergy; the secular
is to be employed for the Church by the hand of the civil
authority, but under the direction of the spiritual power.
+ The one sword must be subordinate to the other: the earthly
power must submit to the spiritual authority, as this has
precedence of the secular on account of its greatness and
sublimity; for the spiritual power has the right to establish
and guide the secular power, and also to judge it when it does
not act rightly. When, however, the earthly power goes astray,
it is judged by the spiritual power; a lower spiritual power
is judged by a higher, the highest spiritual power is judged
by God.
+ This authority, although granted to man, and exercised by man,
is not a human authority, but rather a Divine one, granted to
Peter by Divine commission and confirmed in him and his
successors. Consequently, whoever opposes this power ordained
of God opposes the law of God and seems, like a Manichaean, to
accept two principles.
"Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that
for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be
subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff" (Porro subesse
Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus,
definimus, et pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis).
The Bull is universal in character. As its content shows, a
careful distinction is made between the fundamental principles
concerning the Roman primacy and the declarations as to the
application of these to the secular power and its
representatives. In the registers, on the margin of the text of
the record, the last sentence is noted as its real definition:
"Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanae
creaturae de necessitate salutis" (It is here stated that for
salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject
to the authority of the Roman pontiff). This definition, the
meaning and importance of which are clearly evident from the
connection with the first part on the necessity of the one
Church for salvation, and on the pope as the one supreme head of
the Church, expresses the necessity for everyone who wishes to
attain salvation of belonging to the Church, and therefore of
being subject to the authority of the pope in all religious
matters. This has been the constant teaching of the Church, and
it was declared in the same sense by the Fifth Ecumenical
Council of the Lateran, in 1516: "De necessitate esse salutis
omnes Christi fideles Romano Pontifici subesse" (That it is of
the necessity of salvation for all Christ's faithful to be
subject to the Roman pontiff). The translation by Berchtold of
the expression humanae creaturae by "temporal authorities" is
absolutely wrong. The Bull also proclaims the subjection of the
secular power to the spiritual as the one higher in rank, and
draws from it the conclusion that the representatives of the
spiritual power can install the possessors of secular authority
and exercise judgment over their administration, should it be
contrary to Christian law.
This is a fundamental principle which had grown out of the
entire development in the early Middle Ages of the central
position of the papacy in the Christian national family of
Western Europe. It had been expressed from the eleventh century
by theologians like Bernard of Clairvaux and John of Salisbury,
and by popes like Nicholas II and Leo IX. Boniface VIII gave it
precise expression in opposing the procedure of the French king.
The main propositions are drawn from the writings of St.
Bernard, Hugh of St. Victor, St. Thomas Aquinas, and letters of
Innocent III. Both from these authorities and from declarations
made by Boniface VIII himself, it is also evident that the
jurisdiction of the spiritual power over the secular has for its
basis the concept of the Church as guardian of the Christian law
of morals, hence her jurisdiction extends as far as this law is
concerned. Consequently, when King Philip protested, Clement V
was able, in his Brief "Meruit", of 1 February, 1306, to declare
that the French king and France were to suffer no disadvantage
on account of the Bull "Unam Sanctam", and that the issuing of
this Bull had not made them subject to the authority of the
Roman Church in any other manner than formerly. In this way,
Clement V was able to give France and its ruler a guarantee of
security from the ecclesiastico-political results of the
opinions elaborated in the Bull, while its dogmatic decision
suffered no detriment of any kind. In the struggles of the
Gallican party against the authority of the Roman See, and also
in the writings of non-Catholic authors against the definition
of Papal Infallibility, the Bull "Unam Sanctam" was used against
Boniface VIII as well as against the papal primacy in a manner
not justified by its content. The statements concerning the
relations between the spiritual and the secular power are of a
purely historical character, so far as they do not refer to the
nature of the spiritual power, and are based on the actual
conditions of medieval Western Europe.
J. P. KIRSCH
Ungava
Ungava
A Canadian territory lying north of the Province of Quebec,
detached (1876) from the Great Labrador peninsula. Ungava, whose
area (354,961 sq. m.) surpasses that of Quebec (351,873 sq. m.),
was annexed to the latter province (1912) by the Federal
Government. It is bounded on the west by Hudson's Straits,
comprising Ungava Bay, on the north-east and east by Labrador
proper, on the south by the Province of Quebec, on the west by
Hudson and James' Bays. This land was visited by the Basques, by
Cabot (1493), Weymouth (1602), Hudson (1610), and by the Jesuits
Dablon (1661) and Albanel (1672), on their journey by land to
Hudson Bay. During the last century the Oblates of Mary
Immaculate, Babel (1866 and 1870) and Lacasse (1875),
evangelized the Indians of the interior. The Moravian Brothers
began proselytizing the Esquimaux in 1770. Ungava now depends
spiritually on the Vicariate Apostolic of the Gulf of St.
Lawrence. Its immense forest and mineral resources, fertile
soil, and unparalleled hydraulic power reveal a bright prospect
for colonization and industry. Railway lines are in preparation
between Quebec and Western Canada and Hudson Bay. The census of
1901 gave a population of 5113 souls, comprising the aborigines
(Esquimaux on the coast, Montagnais and Nascaupis in the
interior) and whites.
LIONEL LINDSAY
Uniformity Acts
Uniformity Acts
These statutes, passed at different times, were vain efforts to
secure uniformity in public worship throughout England. But as
the principle of unity had been lost when communion with the See
of Peter was broken off, all such attempts were foredoomed to
failure. They were resisted by Catholics on the one hand and the
Nonconformists on the other. The first of these Acts (2 and 3
Edward VI, c. 1) was called "An Act for Uniformity of Service
and Administration of the Sacraments throughout the Realm".
After a long preamble setting forth the reasons which had led to
the drawing up of "The Book of the Common Prayer and
Administration of the Sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies
of the Church after the use of the Church of England", and the
desirability of having one uniform rite and order in use in all
churches through England and Wales, the statute enacts that
after Pentecost, 1549, all ministers shall be bound to follow
the same in all public services. Then follow penalties against
such of the clergy as shall substitute any other form of
service, or shall not use the "Book of Common Prayer", or who
shall preach or speak against it. Further penalties are decreed
against all who in plays or songs shall mock said book. Private
persons were allowed to use the forms for Matins and Evensong in
Latin, Greek, or Hebrew in their own private devotions, and
liberty was reserved to the universities to have the service in
their college chapels conducted in any of these tongues. There
is nothing in this Act to enforce attendance at public worship,
but the provisions of the Act apply to every kind of public
worship or "open prayer", as it was called, which might take
place. The Act itself defines "open prayer" as "that prayer
which is for others to come unto or near, either in common
churches or private chapels or oratories, commonly called the
service of the Church". This Act was confirmed by 5 and 6 Edw.
VI, c. 1, repealed by I Mary, sess. 2, c. 2, revived by 1 Eliz.,
c. 2, and 1 James I, c. 25, and made perpetual so far as it
relates to the Established Church of England by 5 Anne, c. 5 (c.
8 according to some computations).
The next of these Acts (3 and 4 Edward VI, c. 10) was passed in
1549 under the title "An Act for the abolishing and putting away
of diverse books and images". The preamble of the Act recites
that the king had of late set forth and established by authority
of Parliament an order for common prayer in a book entitled,
"The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments,
and other rites and ceremonies of the Church, after the Church
of England". The first section then suppresses and forbids all
books or writings in Latin or English used for church services
other than such as are appointed by the king's majesty. And all
such books are to be collected by the mayor and other civil
authorities and delivered to the bishop to be destroyed.
But as the "First Prayer-book" of Edward VI did not satisfy the
reformers, it was soon supplanted by the "Second Prayer-book",
issued in 1552 and also sanctioned by Act of Parliament. This
Act of Uniformity is the first to be expressly called by that
name, being entitled "An Act for the Uniformity of Service and
Administration of Sacraments throughout the realm" (5 and 6 Edw.
VI, c. 1). It goes much further than the previous Act, for it
enforces church attendance on Sundays and holy days. After the
preamble declaring the desirability of uniformity, the second
section enacts that after 1 November, 1552, all persons shall
attend their parish church on Sundays and holy days and shall be
present at the common prayer, preaching, or other service, under
pain of punishment by the censures of the Church. The
archbishops and bishops are charged with the task of enforcing
the Act (sect. 3); and they are to inflict the censures of the
Church on offenders (sect. 4). The fifth section refers to the
new "Book of Common Prayer", to which had been added a "Form and
Manner of making and consecrating archbishops, bishops, priests,
and deacons", and declares that all the provisions of the
previous Act shall apply to it. By the sixth and last section
any person convicted of being present at any other form of
common prayer or administration of the sacraments shall be
imprisoned for six months for the first offence, one year for
the second, and shall suffer imprisonment for life for the
third. The Act was to be read in church four times during the
following year and once a year afterwards. It was repealed by I
Mary, sess. 2, c. 2, but revived with certain alterations by 1
Eliz., c. 2, and confirmed by 1 James I, c. 25. It was made
perpetual so far as it relates to the Established Church of
England by 5 Anne, c. 5 (or c. 8 according to the chronological
table of statutes).
Queen Mary contented herself with repealing these statutes of
Edward and thus restoring the ancient liberty. No fresh
Uniformity Act appeared on the statute book till Protestantism
returned under Elizabeth. Then the well known "Act for the
Uniformity of Common Prayer and Service in the Church and
Administration of the Sacraments" (1 Eliz., c. 2) was passed.
The first effect of this statute was to repeal the Act of Mary
as and from 24 June, 1559, and to restore the "Book of Common
Prayer" from that date. The "Second Prayer-book" of Edward VI
with certain additions and alterations was thenceforth to be
used, and any clergyman neglecting to use it or substituting any
other form of open prayer or preaching against it, was on
conviction to suffer penalties which increased with offence till
on the third conviction they mounted to deprivation from all
spiritual preferment and imprisonment for life. Similarly severe
penalties culminating in the forfeiture of all goods and
chattels and imprisonment for life were decreed against all
persons who spoke in derision of the "Book of Common Prayer".
Attendance at church service on Sunday at the parish church was
rendered compulsory, and any person absent without reasonable
cause was to pay a fine of twelve pence, which would be
equivalent to ten shillings in modern English money, or two
dollars and a half. Long and extensive provisions for enforcing
the Act are included, and one section provides for uniformity in
the ornaments of the Church and ministers. This enacts that the
same ornaments shall be retained "as was in this Church of
England, by authority of Parliament, in the second year of King
Edward VI".
This Act proved a powerful weapon against the Catholics, who
could not conscientiously obey it, and it was used consistently
as a means to harass and impoverish them. So effective was it
that it needed no amending, and a century elapsed before the
next Uniformity Act was passed. This was the celebrated Act of
Charles II (13 and 14 Chas. II, c. 4: according to some
computations it is quoted as 15 Chas. II, c. 4). It was followed
by a short Act of Relief (15 Chas. II, c. 6). This Act is of
little or no special interest to Catholics, for it was primarily
designed to regulate the worship of the Church of England, and
so far as Catholics were concerned it added nothing to the
provisions of the Edwardine and Elizabethan Acts.
Relief from the Acts of Uniformity was granted to Catholics by
the Second Catholic Relief Act (31 Geo. III, c. 32), though the
benefits of the Act were limited to those who made the
declaration and took the oath under the Act. So much of this
statute as related to the declaration and oath was repealed in
1871 by the Promissory Oaths Act (34 and 35 Vict., c. 48). There
were certain restrictions and conditions as to Catholic places
of worship, but these were changed in 1832 by the Act 2 and 3
Wm. IV, c. 115, by which Catholics were placed on the same
footing as Protestant dissenters in this and some other
respects. Incidentally this statute made it compulsory to
certify Catholic chapels to the Anglican bishop and archdeacon
and the quarter sessions. But this restriction was abolished in
1855 by 18 and 19 Vict., c. 81, which provided that such
buildings could be notified to the registrar-general instead.
Even this provision has long fallen into disuse and it is not
customary to register Catholic churches except for the
solemnization of marriage. Thus for Catholics, as for
Nonconformists, the provisions of the Uniformity Acts have been
gradually repealed and now they apply only to the Established
Church of England; but to that extent they are still on the
statute-books and as late as 1872 a statute entitled "An Act for
the Amendment of the Act of Uniformity" was passed (35 and 36
Vic., c. 35). As long as the Church of England is the
established religion its worship will be regulated by statute,
so that Acts of Uniformity in one shape or another will remain
part of the English code of law unless, and until,
disestablishment takes place.
EDWIN BURTON
Unigenitus
Unigenitus
A celebrated Apostolic Constitution of Clement XI, condemning
101 propositions of Pasquier Quesnel. In 1671 Quesnel had
published a book entitled "Abrege de la morale de l'Evangile".
It contained the Four Gospels in French, with short notes
explanatory of the text, at the same time serving as aids for
meditation. The work was approved by Bishop Vialart of Chalons.
An enlarged edition, containing an annotated French text of the
New Testament, appeared in three small volumes in 1678, and a
later edition in four volumes appeared under the title "Le
nouveau testament en francais avec dees reflexions morales sur
chaque verse, pour en rendre la lecture plus utile et la
meditation plus aisee" (Paris, 1693-94). This last edition was
highly recommended by Noailes, who had succeeded Vialart as
Bishop of Chalons. While the first edition of the work contained
only a few Jansenistic errors, its Jansenistic tendency became
more apparent in the second edition, and in its complete form,
as it appeared in 1693, it was pervaded with practically all the
errors of Jansenism. Several bishops forbade its reading in
their dioceses, and Clement XI condemned it in his Brief,
"Universi Dominici Gregis", dated 13 July, 1708. The papal Brief
was, however, not accepted in France because its wording and its
manner of publication were not in harmoy with the "Gallican
Liberties". Noailles, who had become Archbishop of Paris and
cardinal, was too proud to withdraw the approbation which he had
inadvertently given to the book while Bishop of Chalons, and
Jansenism again raised its head. To put an end to this situation
several bishops, and especially Louis XIV, asked the pope to
issue a Bull in place of the Brief which the French Government
did not accept. The Bull was to avoid every expression contrary
to the "Gallican Liberties" and to be submitted to the French
Government before publication. To avoid further scandal, the
pope yielded to these humiliating conditions, and in Feb., 1712,
appointed a special congregation of cardinals and theologians to
cull from the work of Quesnel such propositions as were
deserving of ecclesiastical censure. The most influential member
of this congregation was Cardinal Fabroni.
It took the congregation eighteen months to perform its task,
the result of which was the publication of the famous Bull
"Unigenitus Dei Filius" at Rome, 8 Sept., 1713. The Bull begins
with the warning of Christ against false prophets, especially
such as "secretly spread evil doctrines under the guise of piety
and introduce ruinous sects under the image of sanctity"; then
it proceeds to the condemnation of 101 propositions which are
taken verbatim from the last edition of Quesnel's work. The
propositions are condemned respectively as "False, captious,
ill-sounding, offensive to pious ears, scandalous, pernicious,
rash, injurious to the Church and its practices, contumelious to
Church and State, seditious, impious, blasphemous, suspected and
savouring of heresy, favouring heretics, heresy, and schism,
erroneous, bordering on heresy, often condemned, heretical, and
reviving various heresies, especially those contained in the
famous propositions of Jansenius". The first forty-three
propositions repeat the errors of Baius and Jansenius on grace
and predestination, such as: grace works with omnipotence and is
irrestible; without grace man can only commit sin; Christ died
for the elect only. The succeeding twenty-eight propositions
(44-71) concern faith, hope, and charity: every love that is not
supernatural is evil; without supernatural love there can be no
hope in God, no obedience to His law, no good work, no prayer,
no merit, no religion; the prayer of the sinner and his other
good acts performed out of fear of punishment are only new sins.
The last thirty propositions (72-101) deal with the Church, its
discipline, and the sacraments: the Church comprises only the
just and the elect; the reading of the Bible is binding on all;
sacramental absolution should be postponed till after
satisfaction; the chief pastors can exercise the Church's power
of excommunication only with the consent, at least presumed, of
the whole body of the Church; unjust excommunication does not
exclude the excommunicated from union with the Church. Besides
condemning these 101 propositions, the Bull states that it finds
fault with many other statements in the book of Quesnel,
without, however, specifying them, and, in particular, with the